Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Markus Teich dixit:
> 
> >I am using mksh for nearly a year now, but only recently I noticed some weird
> >behaviour with the history file. When I have multiple pts open and enter a
> >Command in one of them, it can't be found in the history of the others.
> 
> It can, if you press Enter in the other shell.

Unfortunately it did not work for me. I opened a new instance of st running mksh
and entered „echo hi there“, then opened another new instance of st running mksh
and I could not get the command from the history. Not by pressing the up-arrow,
nor by invoking the „I-search“ with ctrl-r. Also this did not change after
pressing return in both shells.

I am using mksh 48b from the gentoo tree on a x86_64 3.12.7 kernel.

> >Also often the whole „local“ history of a pts gets lost when exiting that pts
> >with Ctrl-D.
> >
> >In my .mkshrc I have:
> >export HISTFILE=$HOME/.mksh_history
> >export HISTSIZE=4200
> 
> If you have about 4198 entries, this behaviour will indeed exist.  The only
> solutions here are to either raise HISTSIZE or truncate the history file to
> something smaller yourself (e.g. using the 「fc -l」 and 「print -s」
> commands).
> 
> This is parallel processing and unstable. I do not believe in persistent
> history, nor its current implementation, and have only retained it in mksh
> because it’s a really popular feature, but will continue to discourage using
> it (e.g. for privacy and data retention reasons, asides from code issues),
> even though I fixed the worst bugs.

Will the shared history work, even if I disable the persistent history? I would
rather use a working shared history with no persistence than a persistent one
that behaves unexpectedly. :(

> >Is there a reason for using a binary format for the history instead of
> >a simple textfile where each command is appended?
> 
> Faster access, line numbers, and compatibility to earlier
> versions of mksh/mirbsdksh/oksh/pdksh.

Could it be the case, that my history file is broken, because I think I removed
some commands just be removing the string and the control characters around it,
which I assumed to corellate to this entry?

> PS: Can we bounce this to the mailing list? If you respond
>     in positive I’ll do that. I believe this is of worth to
>     most readers.

Yes, we can.

Kind regards,
Markus

Reply via email to