-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 584
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Tracking bash-preexec
issue
#2059
Comments
It depends massively on the users setup, and how much they've configured their prompt/shell in general bash-preexec is built on traps and PS1, in order to add shell hooks. It generally works fine so long as the user has an up-to-date bash, but there might be edge cases here and there. There isn't really much that can be done to workaround or improve this, as it is in essence a hack. ble.sh provides full functionality as we'd expect, but totally replaces the line editor. We cannot and should not install that for users as the default, as it does so much more than they might expect |
Hmm, but at least you reckon a clean installation will not have unintended consequences? And how obvious is it when they encounter a breakage? I myself have not encountered anything (or at least I don't know what I'm supposed to look out for), but I have a vanilla setup. |
There are still minor problems even with clean installation when the user uses older versions of The setup can be broken more easily with any other customizations. The problems are all related to the inherent limitations in the approach With the latest |
Thanks for the overview @akinomyoga. This is good because for downstream as long as we know what are the bugs that need to be fixed and tracked, we can apply the patches on top of the release, and poke upstream to cut releases more often. |
I'm going to close this one - our install script and recommended install method use the bash-preexec Otherwise, the state of bash-preexec can be nicely summarized by their issue tracker |
Right now between
bash-preexec
andble.sh
, the former has less side-effects and it might be easier to package and ship, at least as the default dependency for the Fedora package. But the warning on the front-page raises questions. Is there any issue to be tracked either onatuin
orbash-preexec
about the failures mentioned?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: