Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 27, 2023 at 19:42 comment added Matthias Braun See also unix.stackexchange.com/questions/226214/…
Nov 20, 2019 at 19:14 comment added msb @dashesy I personally don't like to ignore/erase duplicate entries. I have HISTTIMEFORMAT enabled, and I like to be able to go back and see when I issued a command... and if I issued it multiple times, I like to know when each one was issued. It's a personal preference, to which their own. ;)
Jun 17, 2019 at 18:26 comment added maxschlepzig @Marc.2377 No, without histappend new history from concurrently running shells would then be lost and only the entries of the last exiting shell would be saved. Btw, I don't know if HISTSIZE= has the same effect as a negative HISTSIZE.
Jun 17, 2019 at 1:32 comment added Marc.2377 Is histappend effective meaningless if I have HISTFILESIZE= and HISTSIZE= for infinite history?
May 25, 2016 at 22:22 comment added dashesy does anyone run less than 2 bash instances? histappend as well as HISTCONTROL=ignoredups:erasedups:ignorespace seems like a good default for most people.
Nov 16, 2015 at 22:54 comment added underscore_d +1 for "does not mean that the history is wiped on each shell exit". This is explained perfectly well elsewhere - but perhaps not succinctly enough to reach some readers, especially in the context of the option's name (OK, I might have been one of those readers for awhile). @Mei, how does either permutation of histappend have any relevance to whether root's history reaches a disk? Again, it only affects what is written, not if.
Feb 12, 2015 at 12:55 history edited tshepang CC BY-SA 3.0
simpler
Feb 4, 2012 at 0:50 comment added Mei Also, for security reasons, it can be a good idea to not save history for the root user. This feature allows root to have a shell history without it ever being saved to disk.
Feb 3, 2011 at 17:21 vote accept tshepang
Jan 26, 2011 at 20:44 history answered maxschlepzig CC BY-SA 2.5