On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Robert Nesius <nesius at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Robert Nesius <nesius at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Mike Miller <mbmiller+l at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> ...and I'm noticing that "history -a file" does not do anything if I
>>> wrote previously with "history -w file".  I think this is a very serious bug
>>> that could cause loss of an important command history.
>>>
>>> I see here that it has been fixed in bash 4.2 release candidate 2...
>>>
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.bash.bug/browse_thread/thread/48152c5e8c35b743?pli=1
>>>
>>> ...but I'm still on 4.0.33 on my main box.  It gets worse.  Here are two
>>> other boxes that I use a lot:
>>>
>>>
>>> How many years will pass before I get the bug fix?  With CentOS I'll
>>> probably die first.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> bash is pretty easy to build.  I'm sure you could crank out a personal
>> version and set your shell to use it instead (or exec your personel version
>> during the login phase) in a blink.  I'd probably just symlink to my
>> personal copy until the distro finally caught up and then replace the
>> symlink with the old binary before doing the update.  (That's me - there are
>> probably better ways to do it, like changing your default shell in
>> /etc/passwd)...
>>
>> The whole point of Open Source was, in part, to facillitate collaboration
>> and to enable people to get bug fixes as soon as they are fixed.  If you
>> want to wait on a productized distro to eventually get around to it, that's
>> your business.  But it's not their fault for not jumping on an issue as as
>> quickly as you'd like.  Unless you're paying them and they've violated an
>> SLA you paid money for them to abide by.
>>
>> wget ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/bash/<the_one_you_want>.tar.gz
>> tar -xzf bash*gz
>> cd bash*
>> ./configure --prefix=$HOME/bin
>> make
>> make install
>>
>> configure your system to get the new shell as you like.  Make sure you
>> have libreadline and its headers along with build-essentials (i.e., a
>> working compiler).   You might need a few other libs too but libreadline is
>> the big one for bash.
>>
>> Also, I always do a ./configure --help and review flags for functionality
>> I need to flip at compile time before running the full configure.  And, of
>> course, it's never a bad idea to check the signatures of the files you
>> download before compiling them - especially if root is going to run your
>> shell.  :)
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> Whoops.  I'm getting rusty.
>
> wget ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/bash/gnu/the_one_you_want.tar.gz
>
> Aaaaand.... bash 4.2 hasn't been released yet, and unlike a lot of projects
> apparently the bash source is not fully visible per this interesting thread:
>
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-bash@gnu.org/msg06351.html
>
> Allegedly the bash source is visible on Savannah but I'm not sure how
> current it is.  The point being... the bash owner hasn't even provided a
> release for people to pull and deploy yet.  I think you're being a bit harsh
> on CentOS. ;-)
>
> -Rob
>
>
*sigh* I have a cold.  I blame it.  The URL for all bash source tarballs:
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/bash <ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/bash/>

I'm going to look for nyquil now.

_Rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20110209/f2e15b2b/attachment.html>