From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17236 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2013 15:12:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 18168 Received: (qmail 14518 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2013 15:12:17 -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,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Liw8ljA/bYXvlAQ36qV9Fx5uH+UfJaAE3xLZN1RRwYM=; b=bn++1908GP1ALEhaG4QYaymKaGezD+8GEqwZayCImiQXyYpK8YSJHIzmr04WjorlCr Zu7W1G2zVyoxX4uCZKppw0SGb0ZAdbfo0zg9pVT8ppouDWpkYjlOVE8nT+LBgoloy6nd GRE95HXnJ6SPwhGnNWE42WGgFD4yle6oFjGuWEYbWTEpvrSysZjDnhhF24fqY5uhbWlw ZTciQtURK4F5UJdeT71b2vkBb3NlbqeId3ymHISX0VbRzJPafc2bBRX1ZrXSG/U4Z1AE M9+NREYUuxKRKyC5/B8MmPJ/RxcDdcV930tJkGFJPr2spPMqEc2M8kHakGIT0Xe6ijBl lkoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnGE9Bbjz5V8wWT+0Z3kfiLyqdLS585uA3GXWHyFtFsM1ftmPPNz8AwRSsSItNTaatUwENd X-Received: by 10.52.230.202 with SMTP id ta10mr630813vdc.41.1385565134493; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:12:14 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.58.7.40 with SMTP id g8mr258735vea.45.1385565132542; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:12:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <131127000208.ZM18878@torch.brasslantern.com> From: Karoly Negyesi Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:11:52 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: shared history but recalling history in current terminal To: shawn wilson Cc: Bart Schaefer , Zsh Users Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6d8dcc89dc1204ec2a05ae --047d7b6d8dcc89dc1204ec2a05ae Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 This is interesting to me as well. If I do what Bart suggests, do I keep the setopt inc_append_history share_history line or not...? Thanks NK On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:49 AM, shawn wilson wrote: > Sweet. Works great. Thanks > > (Now I'm only pissed off that I put up with this for so long and > didn't ask sooner) > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 3:02 AM, Bart Schaefer > wrote: > > On Nov 26, 10:31pm, Wayne Davison wrote: > >> > >> bindkey '^p' up-line-or-local-history > >> > >> up-line-or-local-history() { > >> zle set-local-history 1 > >> zle up-line-or-history > >> zle set-local-history 0 > >> } > >> zle -N up-line-or-local-history > > > > Another possibility is something like: > > > > zle-line-init() { zle set-local-history 1 } > > zle -N zle-line-init > > > > zle-keymap-select() { > > [[ $KEYMAP = isearch ]] > > zle set-local-history $? > > } > > zle -N zle-keymap-select > > > > Then incremental search is non-local history, everything else is local, > > and you don't have to re-create individual keybindings. > --047d7b6d8dcc89dc1204ec2a05ae--