Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: LONG_LIST_JOBS doesn't affect all job listings?
- X-seq: zsh-workers 21365
- From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: LONG_LIST_JOBS doesn't affect all job listings?
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:23:37 +0000
- In-reply-to: <200506200955.j5K9t6fN005782@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <1050620034619.ZM21043@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200506200955.j5K9t6fN005782@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Jun 20, 10:55am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: LONG_LIST_JOBS doesn't affect all job listings?
}
} I would certainly have said bg and fg should work like job
} notifications, at least.
Even job notifications aren't consistent; only *asynchronous* notices
get the long format. If you have no_notify set, the short form is used.
[That's because scanjobs() also ignores long_list_jobs.]
} Is this connected with users/8989? The messages seem to be generally
} rather inconsistent.
Yes; I was peeking at how difficult it would be to implement tcsh's
option, and was using LONGLISTJOBS as a placeholder (and wondering if
perhaps it couldn't just be employed full time as a stand-in).
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author