Search Results

Search found 29 results on 2 pages for 'zshrc'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • Is it possible to use different zsh menu selection behaviour for different commands?

    - by kine
    I'm using the menu select behaviour in zsh, which invokes a menu below the cursor where you can see the various possibilities. The .zshrc option i have set for this is zstyle ':completion:*' menu select=2 By default, pressing Return to select a possibility in this menu only completes the word — it does not actually send the command. For example, I might get a menu like this ~ % cd de<TAB> completing directory: [Desktop/] Development/ Pressing Return here will result in ~ % cd Desktop/ I then have to press Return a second time to actually send the command. I can modify this behaviour to make it so that pressing Return both selects the completion and sends the command by doing this bindkey -M menuselect '^M' .accept-line However, there's a problem with this: sometimes I need to complete a file or directory without sending the command. For example, I might need to do ln -s Desktop Desktop2 — with this bindkey behaviour, trying to complete Desktop will result in ln -s Desktop/ being sent as the command, and obviously I don't want that. I'm aware that just pressing space will let me get on with the command, but it's now a habit. Given this, is there a way to make it so that only some commands let you press Return once (like cd), but all other commands require pressing it twice?

    Read the article

  • Git is not using the first editor in my $PATH

    - by GuillaumeA
    I am using OS X 10.8, and I used brew to install a more recent version of emacs than the one shipped with OS X. The newer emacs binary is installed in /usr/local/bin (24.2.1), and the old "shipped-with-osx" one in /usr/bin (22.1.1). I updated my $PATH env variable by prepending /usr/local/bin to it. It works fine in my shell (ie. typing emacs runs the 24.2.1 version), but when git opens the editor, the emacs version is 22.1.1. Isn't git supposed to use $PATH to find the editor I want to use ? Additional informations: $ type -a emacs emacs is /usr/local/bin/emacs emacs is /usr/bin/emacs emacs is /usr/local/bin/emacs $ env PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/bin SHELL=/bin/zsh PAGER=most EDITOR=emacs -nw _=/usr/bin/env Please note that I'd prefer not to set the absolute path of my editor directly in my git conf, as I use this conf across multiple systems. EDIT: Here's an bit of my .zshrc: # Mac OS X if [ `uname` = "Darwin" ]; then # Brew binaries PATH="/usr/local/bin":"/usr/local/sbin":$PATH else # Everyone else (Linux) # snip fi So, yes, I could add a line export EDITOR='/usr/local/bin emacs -nw' in the first if, but I'd like to understand why git is not using my PATH variable :)

    Read the article

  • How to setup ssh's umask for all type of connections

    - by Unode
    I've been searching for a way to setup OpenSSH's umask to 0027 in a consistent way across all connection types. By connection types I'm referring to: sftp scp ssh hostname ssh hostname program The difference between 3. and 4. is that the former starts a shell which usually reads the /etc/profile information while the latter doesn't. In addition by reading this post I've became aware of the -u option that is present in newer versions of OpenSSH. However this doesn't work. I must also add that /etc/profile now includes umask 0027. Going point by point: sftp - Setting -u 0027 in sshd_config as mentioned here, is not enough. If I don't set this parameter, sftp uses by default umask 0022. This means that if I have the two files: -rwxrwxrwx 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 execute -rw-rw-rw- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 read-write When I use sftp to put them in the destination machine I actually get: -rwxr-xr-x 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 execute -rw-r--r-- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 read-write However when I set -u 0027 on sshd_config of the destination machine I actually get: -rwxr--r-- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 execute -rw-r--r-- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 read-write which is not expected, since it should actually be: -rwxr-x--- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 execute -rw-r----- 1 user user 0 2011-01-29 02:04 read-write Anyone understands why this happens? scp - Independently of what is setup for sftp, permissions are always umask 0022. I currently have no idea how to alter this. ssh hostname - no problem here since the shell reads /etc/profile by default which means umask 0027 in the current setup. ssh hostname program - same situation as scp. In sum, setting umask on sftp alters the result but not as it should, ssh hostname works as expected reading /etc/profile and both scp and ssh hostname program seem to have umask 0022 hardcoded somewhere. Any insight on any of the above points is welcome. EDIT: I would like to avoid patches that require manually compiling openssh. The system is running Ubuntu Server 10.04.01 (lucid) LTS with openssh packages from maverick. Answer: As indicated by poige, using pam_umask did the trick. The exact changes were: Lines added to /etc/pam.d/sshd: # Setting UMASK for all ssh based connections (ssh, sftp, scp) session optional pam_umask.so umask=0027 Also, in order to affect all login shells regardless of if they source /etc/profile or not, the same lines were also added to /etc/pam.d/login. EDIT: After some of the comments I retested this issue. At least in Ubuntu (where I tested) it seems that if the user has a different umask set in their shell's init files (.bashrc, .zshrc,...), the PAM umask is ignored and the user defined umask used instead. Changes in /etc/profile did't affect the outcome unless the user explicitly sources those changes in the init files. It is unclear at this point if this behavior happens in all distros.

    Read the article

  • Translate parse_git_branch function to zsh from bash (for prompt)

    - by yar
    I am using this function in Bash function parse_git_branch { git_status="$(git status 2> /dev/null)" pattern="^# On branch ([^${IFS}]*)" if [[ ! ${git_status}} =~ "working directory clean" ]]; then state="*" fi # add an else if or two here if you want to get more specific if [[ ${git_status} =~ ${pattern} ]]; then branch=${BASH_REMATCH[1]} echo "(${branch}${state})" fi } but I'm determined to use zsh. While I can use this perfectly as a shell script (even without a shebang) in my .zshrc the error is a parse error on this line if [[ ! ${git_status}}... What do I need to do to get it ready for zshell? Edit: The "actual error" I'm getting is " parse error near } and it refers to the line with the strange double }}, which works on Bash. Edit: Here's the final code, just for fun: parse_git_branch() { git_status="$(git status 2> /dev/null)" pattern="^# On branch ([^[:space:]]*)" if [[ ! ${git_status} =~ "working directory clean" ]]; then state="*" fi if [[ ${git_status} =~ ${pattern} ]]; then branch=${match[1]} echo "(${branch}${state})" fi } setopt PROMPT_SUBST PROMPT='$PR_GREEN%n@$PR_GREEN%m%u$PR_NO_COLOR:$PR_BLUE%2c$PR_NO_COLOR%(!.#.$)' RPROMPT='$PR_GREEN$(parse_git_branch)$PR_NO_COLOR' Thanks to everybody for your patience and help. Edit: The best answer has schooled us all: git status is porcelain (UI). Good scripting goes against GIT plumbing. Here's the final function: parse_git_branch() { in_wd="$(git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null)" || return test "$in_wd" = true || return state='' git diff-index HEAD --quiet 2>/dev/null || state='*' branch="$(git symbolic-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null)" test -z "$branch" && branch='<detached-HEAD>' echo "(${branch#refs/heads/}${state})" } PROMPT='$PR_GREEN%n@$PR_GREEN%m%u$PR_NO_COLOR:$PR_BLUE%2c$PR_NO_COLOR%(!.#.$)' RPROMPT='$PR_GREEN$(parse_git_branch)$PR_NO_COLOR' Note that only the prompt is zsh-specific. In Bash it would be your prompt plus "\$(parse_git_branch)". This might be slower (more calls to GIT, but that's an empirical question) but it won't be broken by changes in GIT (they don't change the plumbing). And that is very important for a good script moving forward. Days Later: Ugh, it turns out that diff-index HEAD is NOT the same as checking status against working directory clean. So will this mean another plumbing call? I surely don't have time/expertise to write my own porcelain....

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2