>
> Ok, looked at the change log, and nothing sprang out, but I did
> somethinking - does Bash on Debian (or whatever system that has a new Bash
> and doesn't feature that annoying behaviour) compiles with readline ?
>
> Anyway - I recompiled Bash from the Mandrake source RPM - this time making
> sure to remove the --with-installed-readline option from configure, and
> now it doesn't do that anymore -
> [oded@computer oded]$ echo -n test
> test[oded@computer oded]$
>
> yey :-)
> so this looks like a readline feature, which bash gets just from using
> readline. from looking at the changelog, I think (not a readline expert
> here ;-) that it's possible to user readline, w/o letting it draw the
> prompt, and thus regain the MDK72 behaviour.
>
> Oded
>
I believe that Debian's bash is compiled with readline support. However I
found this:
[01:53:44 tmp]$ zcat /usr/share/doc/libreadline4/changelog.gz | head -8
This document details the changes between this version, readline-4.2,
and the previous version, readline-4.1.
1. Changes to Readline
a. When setting the terminal attributes on systems using `struct termio',
readline waits for output to drain before changing the attributes.
[01:53:59 tmp]$
I wonder if this has something to do with the unexpected behavior. what
version of readline does MDK 8 have?
>
> On Wed, 2 May 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> > Maybe you should check the Bash changelog on whether this is a new thing
> > in Bash. I know that in Zsh, for example, this was changed a few years
> > ago (5 years? I don't remember), and it was also hard for me to get used
> > to it.
> > The rationale behind such a change can be that when the shell has a
> > suphisticated command-line editor, sometimes it needs to know _exactly_
> > what the current line looks like, because some some changes involve more
> > than just backspacing over the last few characters. So if you have some
> > unkown characters like "test" before the prompt, the shell can mess up
> > the look of the line when it redraws some characters in the wrong place,
> > so it prefers to overwrite this "test" word. Previously, when you saw such
> > a mess-up, you had to press control-L for the shell to redraw the entire
> > line.
> >
> > Nowadays, whenever I run a program which might output something without
> > a new line I run it like
> > $ ./test; print
> >
> > By the way, be careful when naming your program "test" - I've seen, more
> > than once, people spending HOURS on trying to figuring out why their program,
> > called "test", did not work. Apparently, it printed nothing, and just exited!
> > Of course, the "solution" is that "test" is a builtin in most shells (for
> > testing existance of files, and stuff like that), so unless you do something
> > like ./test, you end up running a builtin test, that for some unknown reason
> > (at least to me) doesn't print any error when it doesn't have any arguments...
> >
> > On Wed, May 02, 2001, Shaul Karl wrote about "Anything new with Mandrake 8 and the
>missing line of echo -n test?":
> > > Just wondering if there is something new about it?
> > >
>
--
Shaul Karl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
