From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10110 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2002 12:39:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10060 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2002 12:39:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.250) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Aug 2002 12:39:19 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7ICdBmS000468; Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:39:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7ICdA4w000334; Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:39:10 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g7ICdA87000331; Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:39:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 05:39:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200208181239.g7ICdA87000331@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> From: Mark Kettenis To: ezannoni@redhat.com CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <15710.58251.750626.979632@localhost.redhat.com> (message from Elena Zannoni on Sat, 17 Aug 2002 20:00:11 -0400) Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] Fix operate-and-get-next when history list is full References: <200208171003.g7HA3E40042404@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <15710.58251.750626.979632@localhost.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00496.txt.bz2 From: Elena Zannoni Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 20:00:11 -0400 Mark Kettenis writes: > Hi Elena, > > The attached patch fixes a problem with operate-and-get-next when the > history list is full. In that case, when executing a command, the > oldest entry is removed from the history, all other entries are moved > "up", and a new entry is put at the end of the list. In that case we > shouldn't increase the current line by one the find the next line. > bash contains similar code as my patch adds. > > OK to apply? > Sure. Done. Mark