Re: bug 3.1.5 symlinks & cd

[Phil Pennock <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Typing away merrily, Sven Wischnowsky produced the immortal words:
> A (partial) solution is to use a shell function, like this:
[...]
> So the question is: do you think that this is enough (probably with
> some more work on the function) or should we build this into the shell?

Since you asked ... a function is fine, provided either:
 1) that the function/compctl is made standard for future releases;
 2) by default, 'chaselinks' is set and a user needs to explicitly unset
    this.

The former /requires/ extended installation instructions, "to get a
working shell, you will need this here and that there".

The latter would provoke a lot of "why doesn't this work anymore" and
probably a FAQ addition (oh joy).

The issue that the changes in FS semantics is introduced by the shell
and then not carried through to completion (no pun intended, honest!).
The presented directory could affect arbitrary arguments in arbitrary
commands, and to completely 'fix' would require scanning all
arguments... this gets messy.

Uhm..
 a) I've just put 'setopt chaselinks' into my .zshrc
 b) If this doesn't make sense, I'm blaming it on the bang to my head
    which resulted in me getting staples put in by a nurse yesterday --
    I'm not supposed to be using a computer.  :^(
-- 
Phil 'your blood looks interesting coagulating on your glasses' Pennock