Greetings.
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:57:36 +0100 Alexander Sedov <alex0player_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/2/25 Roberto E. Vargas Caballero <k0ga_AT_shike2.com>
>
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 04:44:11AM +0400, Alexander Sedov wrote:
> > > Commenting on this even further:
> > > - tested whether st rightfully extracts selection contents. It does,
> > as
> > > debug output told me, so the problem is in nano.
> >
> > Usually we try don't add code for fixing bugs in others programs. If you
> > find such case, then it is more logical you send the patch to the bugsy
> > application, in this case alpine.
> >
> You meant nano :P. Well, we are pasting text using keyboard emulation
> (writing to fd). Keyboard sends \n, not \r. So it makes total sense.
>
> > > Conclusion: as it is unheard of an application which can't handle
> > carriage
> > > returns, but some buggy applications cannot handle linefeeds well due
> > to
> > > mysterious and arcane reasons, and because workaround costs three
> > lines of
> > > code, I would propose this patch to be applied to upstream.
> >
> > + char *p;
> > + for(p = memchr(s, '\n', n); p != NULL; p = memchr(p, '\n', s + n -
> > p))
> > + *p = '\r';
> >
> > I would prefer something like:
> >
> >
> > char *p = s, *q = s + n;
> >
> > while(p = memchr(p, '\n', q - p))
> > *p = '\r';
> >
> q is kinda superfluous (or maybe call it char *end then?). But yeah,
> 'while' is better.
> Also, I discovered that ttywrite is passed const char *, so it's invalid to
> modify contents.
> So, a new patch.
Do you have any real testcase for this fix to change something? I don’t
have a test case, so you have to try it out and confirm that it works.
Why don’t you modify the buffer in selnotify() instead, if it’s just
needed for that purpose? There the buffer can be easily modified using a
loop.
Sincerely,
Christoph Lohmann
Received on Mon Feb 25 2013 - 20:57:36 CET