On 2024-08-18 at 11:21 +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> Interactive shells with -n (noexec) set are pointless
The man page states:
> -n Read commands but do not execute them. This may be used
> to check a shell script for syntax errors. This is ig‐
>
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 at 06:45, shynur . wrote:
> I believe these output files should be added to `.gitignore` and generated
> during the `make` process.
Not doing so is deliberate in some cases.
In an ideal world, yes they should be generated during `make`, but that
would increase the "build to
This was actually caught by the test suite
---
builtins/shopt.def | 1 +
tests/shopt.right | 4
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtins/shopt.def b/builtins/shopt.def
index 67bc0c22..37fda11e 100644
--- a/builtins/shopt.def
+++ b/builtins/shopt.def
@@ -357,6 +3
Version: GNU bash, version 5.2.15(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
OS: Linux 6.1.0-23-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.99-1
(2024-07-15) x86_64 GNU/Linux
Issue: History Behavior
For up-arrow completion, I think restricting to the history of the
current bash session is the correct beha
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 15:52:22 -0400, supp...@eggplantsd.com wrote:
> I would suggest:
> 2. Restrict up-arrow completion to the history of present session.
This is going to be an *extremely* unpopular suggestion.
Though, I must wonder: do you literally mean *only* the up-arrow (or
Ctrl-P or ESC
2024年8月20日(火) 2:25 Martin D Kealey :
> Perhaps a compromise would be to put the documentation in a directory
> that's not inside the source code directory, so it's easier to `git diff`
> just one or the other. (In practice, that would mean moving some of the
> code into a new subdirectory.)
One c
2024年8月20日(火) 5:52 Koichi Murase :
> 2024年8月20日(火) 2:25 Martin D Kealey :
> > Perhaps a compromise would be to put the documentation in a directory
> > that's not inside the source code directory, so it's easier to `git diff`
> > just one or the other. (In practice, that would mean moving some of
The following suggestions, or close approximations, can all be implemented
using the existing facilities.
On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 05:52, wrote:
> I would suggest:
>
> 1. Append to history file immediately on each command.
>
Easily done by putting `history -a` into `PROMPT_COMMAND`
2. Restrict u
sorry, I meant HISTTIMEFORMAT rather than HISTTIMEFMT
On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 14:58, Martin D Kealey
wrote:
> The following suggestions, or close approximations, can all be implemented
> using the existing facilities.
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 05:52, wrote:
>
>> I would suggest:
>>
>> 1. Append
I know it can. The suggestion is that the default behavior needs some
work:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/67283/is-it-possible-to-make-writing-to-bash-history-immediate
https://askubuntu.com/questions/80371/bash-history-handling-with-multiple-terminals
https://askubuntu.com/questions/885531/h
On Tue, Aug 20, 2024, at 1:42 AM, supp...@eggplantsd.com wrote:
> The suggestion is that the default behavior needs some work
The default behavior is unlikely to change. For every cherry-picked
example of someone unsatisfied with it (bugs aside), there is likely
someone else who prefers it as is
I wouldn't consider dozens of stackoverflow/askubuntu/etc complaints of
missing/disappearing history "cherry-picked". There were far more than
I sent.
I understand not wanting to pull the rug out from under people, but the
kludges Kealey posted were inelegant. An opt-in for the suggested
be
12 matches
Mail list logo
