From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7585: 23.2.90; [PATCH] fix eshell-previous-matching-input Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:42:39 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292274766 9135 80.91.229.12 (13 Dec 2010 21:12:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 21:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: John Wiegley , 7585@debbugs.gnu.org To: Leo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 13 22:12:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSFhE-0006SY-OP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:12:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50094 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSFhE-00018P-3a for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:12:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55961 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSFO4-0003bP-La for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:52:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSFNu-0008E1-UG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:52:48 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:45602) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSFNu-0008Dw-Pt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:52:38 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSF8o-0006Ti-2c; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:37:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 20:37:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7585 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 7585-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7585.129227258924864 (code B ref 7585); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 20:37:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7585) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Dec 2010 20:36:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSF8G-0006Sy-RR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:36:29 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSF8F-0006Sm-W4 for 7585@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:36:28 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtUJACIUBk1FpZA//2dsb2JhbACibIEcecNlhUoEhGSOBQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,337,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="85340259" Original-Received: from 69-165-144-63.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.144.63]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 13 Dec 2010 15:42:39 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 3505558CC2; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:42:39 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Leo's message of "Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:31:00 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:37:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:42501 Archived-At: > Would something like the following acceptable? Thanks. Leo No, don't use `message': this is a real error, use `signal' or `error'. Stefan