[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/11/2008 11:31:38 AM: > On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 10:52 -0500, Ian Shields wrote: > > > "G. Matthew Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > I would say minimally: > > > > > > > > 1. knowledge of .bash_history > > > > 2. history command > > > > 3. !n > > > > 4. !-n > > > 5. !<string> > > > Does anyone think that this is far enough (I actually prefer #5 over > > #3 and > > > #4 for LPIC-1)? > > > > Frankly, I hardly ever use the above history commands. If I can't find > > what I want using ctrl-r, or a few presses of the up arrow, I'm out of > > luck. I think the impact of readline on history editing is more > > important today, than the original set of arcane commands that > > mattered more when you were using a slow dialup line. Editing history > > in vi or emacs mode beats remembering another set of obscure commands. > > My two cents worth. > > > Ian, I agree with this comment, in principal. I'm more likely to use > the emacs bindings than the history command, too. I guess I do what > taki does with languages; switch back and forth without realizing it. > > However...considering that we don't even expect these guys to know > emacs, is it fair for us to expect them to learn the bindings? And > don't get me started on the vi bindings, what a pain those are. > > And there's always the arrows. Everyone gets that quickly. > > As for Alan's comments, HISTSIZE et al would be more LPIC-2 level > content (more for the esotericness, not that we should be testing it at > all). > > Perhaps, it's enough then to leave it at history and .bash_history? > Just from a security POV, they need to know about the history file. > I mentioned having to edit out my passwords, right? :) > > > Regards, > --matt
I don't know whether any distros ship with VI bindings, or indeed with non-incremental EMACS bindings as a default. Apart from knowing about the history file and the possible exposure of passwords (yeah, I've made that mistake too), it doesn't make much sense to HAVE a history file if you can't use it. And search, plus up arrow to recall commands are, IMHO, the most useful functions. Recalling the nth previous command is generally only useful for small values of n and repeated up arrow beats having to shift to get the !, and then key in specific values which I might or might not actually get right, either because of my lousy typing, or because I'm not really sure whether I'm looking for the nth previous one or the one before or after it. And if I accidentally engage fingers before brain and run the wrong command again, what was n becomes n+1. Maybe the aspects of using the history file should be limited to knowledge that there are a few different ways of recalling commands and that it is possible to set key bindings for either VI or EMACS search commands, as well as use the basic history search function. Ian Shields Ph.D. Linux Technologist, ISV & Developer Relations IBM Corp Research Triangle Park, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
