From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-users-return-19248-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 3659 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2014 21:56:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Users List <zsh-users.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-users@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-users-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 19248
Received: (qmail 4337 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2014 21:56:01 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=HYUtEE08 c=1 sm=1 tr=0
 a=CzY0kpuo1HkcYGdqyBUEUw==:117 a=CzY0kpuo1HkcYGdqyBUEUw==:17 a=sicYhokT53YA:10
 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=8UeMegZL0mPQZkJBMoYA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10
Message-id: <543C4AF2.5090406@eastlink.ca>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:58:10 -0700
From: Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.0
MIME-version: 1.0
To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>, zsh-users@zsh.org
Subject: Re: combine/merge .history?
References: <20141002204012.0b884f9c@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
 <542FFF6D.6080105@eastlink.ca> <141004084635.ZM6823@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <543C05F3.2020804@eastlink.ca> <141013105932.ZM6622@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <543C3707.4040906@eastlink.ca> <141013143308.ZM6789@torch.brasslantern.com>
In-reply-to: <141013143308.ZM6789@torch.brasslantern.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 10/13/2014 02:33 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Sorry, I thought you were giving examples of file contents, not examples
> of the output of the "history" command.  I didn't recognize it because I
> never use SHARE_HISTORY and forgot that "foreign" history entries get
> marked with a "*".
My mistake Bart, I should have used the same method for showing both. 
Now that I 'cat' both
the new and old .histfiles, they format exactly the same.
> So ... if the format of entries *in the two files* looks similar, you
> should be OK to combine them.  If both of them have the extended format
> (timestamp:elapsed;command) then you should be able to merge them and
> sort the result by timestamp without any major problems.
>
> Just beware of multi-line entries, e.g., a plain "sort -n" will garble
> those badly.
OK, I"m good to go.