Re: [OT] Not clobbering bash history

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

I moved this to emacs-tangents because thus isn't really about Emacs,
but I don't know of a Bash list to use.  Is there one?

  > Say that the history has eight entries, and a ninth was added by a
  > parallel process, the current process would be at the point after the
  > eighth element and should continue reading from there next time it wants
  > a history entry.

Are you saying that multiple Bash processes in parallel should share
one single history, which would contain all the commands the user
entered in any of these processes?

So the commands of Basb process A and those of Basb process B would be
interspersed in the history?  And as you go forward and back in the
history in Bash process B, you would see A's commands and B's commands
in chronological order?

That makes a kind of sense, but what I would envision is that each
Bash process has its own history with only the commands of that process.

Why do you prefer the shared history file approach
to the one-history-per-process approach?
-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)