Hi Soeren, Soeren Tempel wrote on Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 07:02:25PM +0200:
> Nice, wasn't aware that you also had a patch ready. Yeah, that was due to the fact that we, as developers, often use the lists but sometimes also send comments and patches privately, to reduce the mail volume for everybody. Deciding where to send comments and patches works out well enough overall, but it does occasionally cause slight communication gaps, like in this case. I don't think any general rule can be designed to make it better (at least not more specific than "think about who needs to see this and act accordingly"), it's a matter of case-by-case judgement. > Sounds good to me and also fixes the problem I originally experienced > with 4 byte UTF-8 sequences. Great, thanks for reporting and testing, it's now finally fixed. > BTW: Is there any reason why ksh doesn't use editline for all its line > editing needs? That would allow handling all these nitty-gritty details > in a central place. It would, and in principle, that would be an improvement. But i think editline(3) code quality is insufficent for use in a shell. It's all quite messy and hastily and sloppily written. I tried to polish some of it in the past, but got distracted, so editline(3) code is still full of stuff that needs review and quality improvement. Actually, i'm a bit scared that sftp(1) uses it. Then again, i'm not aware that it caused any major vulnerabilities in the past, and the OpenSSH developers are not at all reckless people, so i am sure they know what they are doing. Yours, Ingo
