Re: revisiting history-file rewriting

[Wayne Davison <wayned@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:40:59PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> This makes me want to get approval on a better version of my history-
> rewriting patch and get it into 4.2.5.

OK, I've incorporated the feedback and committed a slightly modified
version of the original patch that changed the option to be
HIST_SAVE_BY_COPY (enabled by default) and documented it a little
better.  I did not change the use of $HISTFILE.new for the copy's
filename because I think that this will help to avoid extra directory
droppings (of history temp-files) from accumulating.  If folks disagree
with that decision, we can always check in a patch similar to the one I
posted earlier.

So, do we want this in 4.2.5?  I'm not sure if the folks that responded
were approving of this part of the check-in or not.

..wayne..