Re: a really big question : why not "^C" for a CTRL-C with default /bin/sh ?

Philipp Ost wrote:
> On 11/2/25 02:22, cyric@mm.st wrote:
>> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>> On 11/1/25 20:30, Michael Gmelin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 2. Nov 2025, at 00:34, Dennis Clarke <dclarke@blastwave.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is about as annoying as a small sharp stone stuck in a shoe :
>>>>>
>>> ...
>>>> Wasn‘t this always the default behavior in /bin/sh?
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it was and if it is then it is broken and always has been.
>>>
>>> No UNIX shell *ever* behaves this way in at least the last four decades.
>>
>> zsh does, ksh93 (illumos) does.
> 
> ksh93 from ports (shells/ksh93) does not.

I guess my answer was ambiguous, "does" here was meant to be "does
behave that way", i.e. "does not print ^C when editing the line".

>>> Perhaps three decades. As far back as I can recall and that includes
>>> using paper terminals. It may be the libedit library there has a borked
>>> way of dealing with a SIGINT.