[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Problem with shift-up
From: |
peter . frings |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Problem with shift-up |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:09:25 +0200 |
Good morning all,
I’ve got some answers for Bastien and Ista below.
On 19 Aug 2011, at 22:10, Bastien wrote:
> Peter Frings <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> When loading the starter-kit from Kieran Healy [1],
>
> AFAIU, this starter-kit relies on the commit c88c76b of Org:
> https://github.com/kjhealy/emacs-starter-kit/tree/master/src
>
> Please make sure to report what your exact version of Org is (M-x
> org-version), that might help.
org-mode 7.7. However, it does not seem like an org problem since it works fine
with a minimal org set-up.
>> In both cases, 'shift-select-mode’ is t.
>
> What is the value of `org-support-shift-select'? Maybe the
> starter-kit is setting this variable.
nil
>> What the heck is ‘translating’ this key binding?
>
> When a composed keybinding like <S-up> does not point to any command,
> Emacs "translates" it to <up> and use the associated command instead.
>
>> How can I find the guilty one so I can do very cruel things to it?
>
> I suggest you ask to the author of the starter-kit :)
Might not be a bad idea :-)
On 19 Aug 2011, at 22:37, Ista Zahn wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Peter Frings <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> (windmove-default-keybindings) is called in
> starter-kit-keybindings.org, and this does take of the shift +
> direction keys. The 'Helpful packages' section of starter-kit-org.org
> also looks suspicious.
Sorry, I forgot to mention… I disabled those windmove-default-keybindings and
bound the windmove keys to A-M-left and friends. I also disabled those in the
starter-kit-org.
I fear that debugging this issue will take way too much time from my work. I
might go back to something simpler, although I was appealed to the neat
structure and the use of org mode of setting up emacs. But that same neatness
and de-structuring makes the whole thing a bit opaque.
Thanks for the suggestions, and I’m open for more! :-)
Cheers,
Peter.