Hi,
I wonder whether it is feasible to consistently map home/end to \e[1~ and
\e[4~ in all applications? While I think this is policy-stuff, a
discussion here may be useful.
Inputrc and cshrc can be used to map the different possible
key-sequences, but I agree with you that this is not very nice,
especially since it means that apps such as joe will have to be able to
deal with all different possibilities. It would be much easier if all
apps could rely on \e[1~ and \e[4~ to be used for home/end. I wonder, is
there any reason for using "\e[H", or
"\e[7~"?
The current home/end situation (in readline terms):
console and xterm:
"\e[1~":beginning-of-line
"\e[4~":end-of-line
--
non-conformists:
kvt:
"\e[H":beginning-of-line
"\e[F":end-of-line
rxvt:
"\e[7~":beginning-of-line
"\e[8~":end-of-line
others?
rxvt can probably be recompiled to use \e[1~ and \e[4~ (or to use
Xresources), kvt (an rxvt derivative) can too, but I don't know how
Debian deals with the kde stuff.
> You may want to bring the rxvt maintainer in ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). There are
> other
> rxvt derivatives like eterm that may also benefit.
That's a good idea, however, what the maintainers should do about it
depends on whether it's desirable to make a policy of only using \e[1~
and \e[4~ or not. To me it seems sensible to make such a policy, if
there are problems with kvt we can at least start with rxvt, leaving
two different entries in e.g. cshrc instead of three. It's entirely
possible that I am not aware of certain problems or issues.
Regards, Anne
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
