On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Apr 2001 17:30:49 +0200
>
>> For example, what happens if we do "HISTSIZE=0" in addition to
>> "unset HISTFILE"?
>
> IIRC I tried that, and it didn't work: ksh made temp files.
What was their size? So should HISTFILE be left at a def
>> For example, what happens if we do "HISTSIZE=0" in addition to
>> "unset HISTFILE"?
> IIRC I tried that, and it didn't work: ksh made temp files.
Have you tried /dev/null ?
Also since the current code doesn't use here-documents any more, your
.sh_history file should grow much slower now (it sh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Apr 2001 17:30:49 +0200
> Anyway, could somebody with a ksh try various things to turn off its
> history?
How soon they forget :-)
http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-rcp@ls6.cs.uni-dortmund.de/
has a thread ".sh_history problem" that started Sat, 17 Ma
Added to FAQ. Thanks.
kai
--
Be indiscrete. Do it continuously.
Ted Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 21 Mar 2001 14:25:44 -0800
> Here's another thing to try in .kshrc:
> if [ -f $HOME/.sh_history ] ; then
>/bin/rm $HOME/.sh_history
> fi
> if [ "${HISTFILE-unset}" != "unset" ] ; then
>unset HISTFILE
> fi
> if [ "${HISTSIZE-unset}" != "unset" ] ; then
>u
Ted Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 21 Mar 2001 09:48:53 -0800
> For ksh problems with .sh_histfile, it might be advisable to modify
> the .ksh startup file.
> For example, one could add to ~/.profile the lines
> ENV=$HOME/.kshrc; export ENV
> unset HISTFILE
> unset HISTSIZE
>
For ksh problems with .sh_histfile, it might be advisable to modify the .ksh
startup file.
For example, one could add to ~/.profile the lines
ENV=$HOME/.kshrc; export ENV
unset HISTFILE
unset HISTSIZE
/bin/rm .sh_history
Or the last three lines could be added to
Kai Großjohann writes:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Pete Forman wrote:
> > It's bad enough at the moment that tramp swamps the history.
>
> That's bad. There is code in it that tries to avoid this. Does
> this not work for you? Please help me fix it.
I've updated to version 2.0.2.1 and that do
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Pete Forman wrote:
> 0 and 1 are non-starters. .sh_history is shared by all instances of
> ksh. Deleting it will lose the history of any other active shells.
That's right. So Tramp just shouldn't write anything to the file.
> It's bad enough at the moment that tramp swam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> At least three outcomes are, at least theoretically, viable:
>
> 0 Make .sh_history disappear _during_ the tramp session.
>
> 1 Make .sh_history disappear _after_ exiting the tramp session.
>
> 2 Do nothing.
>
> Personally, I vote for outcome 1.
0 and 1 ar
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 19 Mar 2001 20:52:13 +0100
>>> What happens when you do it the second time?
>
> Unfortunately, .sh_history doesn't stay dead:
Maybe there is a misunderstanding here. Doing the settings tells the
currently running instance of ksh to not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 19 Mar 2001 20:52:13 +0100
>> What happens when you do it the second time?
Unfortunately, .sh_history doesn't stay dead:
> /ncsu/tlroche> ksh
> $ unset HISTSIZE
> $ unset HISTFILE
> $ foo
> ksh: foo: not found
> $ bar
> ksh: bar: not found
> $ ls -alt | head
> total 11109
> -
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 19 Mar 2001 20:52:13 +0100
>> What happens when you do it the second time?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean--a second time in the same session? or
> when I start a new session?
ksh
unset HISTSIZE
unset HISTFILE
foo
bar
# check .sh_histor
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>> So, although 'unset' doesn't make .sh_history, or its successor, go
>> away upon _utterance_, it does appear to make it go away upon
>> _exit_-- which IIRC is better than what we had, and mostly solves
>> the problem of the ever-growing .sh_history (except
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> So, although 'unset' doesn't make .sh_history, or its successor, go
> away upon _utterance_, it does appear to make it go away upon
> _exit_-- which IIRC is better than what we had, and mostly solves
> the problem of the ever-growing .sh_history (except for
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>>> Truly annoying. What part of "no history" doesn't it understand
>>> ?-) Or, now that I think of it ... could this actually be
>>> something AFS is doing (given that 'afs' is part of the filename)?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 19 Mar 2001 11:57:42 +0100
>> I don't kn
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> Truly annoying. What part of "no history" doesn't it understand ?-)
> Or, now that I think of it ... could this actually be something
> AFS is doing (given that 'afs' is part of the filename)? But why?
I don't know AFS. But you get similar files with NFS.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>> How do I "[set ksh envvars] from within Tramp"? Must I hack
>> tramp.el?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 18 Mar 2001 18:12:37 +0100
> Well, of course you can hack tramp.el. But you can also try it out
> outside of Tramp, by logging in to the remote host, starting ksh
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 18 Mar 2001 00:11:04 +0100
>
> Umm ... I may not be such a skilled user, but I _do_ know how to
> read a manpage :-)
*blush*
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>>> http://www.ntua.gr/cgi-bin/man-cgi?ksh+1
Command Re-entry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 18 Mar 2001 00:11:04 +0100
> Excuse me if this is very stupid, but why don't you just read the
> man page of _your_ ksh?
My impression is, and I have heard from folks who should know, that
documentation on local (AFSspace, anyway) packages is often way
downlevel (and is sometime
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>>> * is tramp writing to this file?
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Mar 2001 21:18:10 +0100
>> No, Tramp itself is not writing to the file, but I think the shell
>> is. If you read the documentation for ksh and tell me how
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>> * is tramp writing to this file?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Mar 2001 21:18:10 +0100
> No, Tramp itself is not writing to the file, but I think the shell
> is. If you read the documentation for ksh and tell me how to turn off
> the history, I'll put that code in
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
> * is tramp writing to this file?
No, Tramp itself is not writing to the file, but I think the shell
is. If you read the documentation for ksh and tell me how to turn off
the history, I'll put that code in Tramp. (There is already code for
turning off the
Just now I was working in TRAMP (after corresponding about it--I seem
to be trapped in a tramp-centric universe :-) when I was unable to
save changes to a file. After thrashing about for a bit, I found
* I was over quota for filespace on the device
* ... due to
/ncsu/tlroche> ls -alFS
tota
24 matches
Mail list logo
