Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Bind ":" to execute-named-cmd in vicmd?
- X-seq: zsh-users 14054
- From: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Bind ":" to execute-named-cmd in vicmd?
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:48:20 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7CJeZPEeK/43OBJsQBqtT7GvRhlzPl4hujcIiCrwJBA=; b=GHQ7IpSV6v0SAeJFdhXwtelj0n0j63wSl7hw8EdC3domiKoDw3IniKX5ZY1CWyInW/ dF8MJNUSEQJCoSB/uQHf0KiX5esAHFxgHfucHXtcSP2DssB6R2zn015tkp6IX1JNQncX qTd8jNu9ZamLiOy/6G6Bh0lt4JCYeKq0zN71I=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Y9lop1mE16hl+ChJ90Gnmb59WJYwE1IE10smt1+viwnHSh7jinhComjVW+oQwbUT8a e/YHCrwJXOzy4tn2GBJyji+NklG8g0rnhqi64UsS4AWM7BEwhRaioZvDFyqYUNxdK7OA WS8wmdo6yhDsdy8VVGesbFhffKlyy9Z5BnZI8=
- In-reply-to: <c21da7250904210144w5e2754c0ucb02179941cca513@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <c21da7250904170029s1b333208pe8a1c4aaa09ffda6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090417161426.66c6c2db@news01> <090417083724.ZM25247@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <c21da7250904171048q7093eaf4l6fe8b4e2e43cc95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <c21da7250904172105q9356992gc167a1681d572061@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m3zledsiyv.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <c21da7250904210144w5e2754c0ucb02179941cca513@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
2009/4/21 Ian Tegebo <ian.tegebo@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Greg Klanderman <gak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Ian Tegebo <ian.tegebo@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> I think the awkwardness would be removed if there was a keymap for the
>>> minibuffer where Esc could be bound to send-break.
>>
>> There is; see the 'command' keymap (in 4.3.10, added about 3 months ago).
> To save someone else the trouble (resulting from misunderstanding the
> above comment):
>
> 4.3.10 doesn't exist yet. ÂThe current development version is 4.3.9
> seemingly to imply the next stable release to be 4.3.10.
All 4.3.x releases are unstable, the next stable release would be 4.4.0.
--
Mikael Magnusson
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author