[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x C-f RET change
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: C-x C-f RET change |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Nov 2005 21:20:47 +0200 |
> From: "Drew Adams" <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 07:29:04 -0800
>
> I too prefer the old behavior, especially for `C-x 4 f'.
It was infinitely more confusing for lots of users. Even I sometimes
fell into that trap.
- C-x C-f RET change, Florian Weimer, 2005/11/09
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, Reiner Steib, 2005/11/09
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/09
- Re: C-x C-f RET change,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, David Kastrup, 2005/11/10
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/10
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, Andreas Schwab, 2005/11/10
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/10
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, David Kastrup, 2005/11/10
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/10
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, David Kastrup, 2005/11/10
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/10
- Re: C-x C-f RET change, Juri Linkov, 2005/11/11
- RE: C-x C-f RET change, Drew Adams, 2005/11/11