What happens to my actual shell-provided history?
Does too much for me.
edit:
> Both files follow the XDG base directory spec, so neither lives in the install directory. Removing whetuu with rm -rf ~/.whetuu cannot take your history with it. whetuu paths prints both locations.
Please stop creating directories in my $HOME.
I tried a few (Atuin? McFly?) but the performance wasn't good with my massive zsh history (going back several years).
Zsh+fzf does a buttery smooth job (no folders though, unfortunately). Other tools start to stutter at scale.
It does hijacks shell history. If I press the up arrow, I expect _my shell_ to handle it how I configured it, not your tool. Because you’re saying your tool is a shell prompt!
A shell prompt is the program that runs before and after every shell command to show me contextual information like the current directory, and the exit code of the last command.
If you want this to be include customizations beyond the prompt, stop calling it a prompt.
it does:
https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir/latest/
User-specific executable files may be stored in $HOME/.local/bin. Distributions should ensure this directory shows up in the UNIX $PATH environment variable, at an appropriate place.
i prefer ~/bin/ but this is better than creating you own directory that needs to be added to the path.
I'm on the fence about my current "2-line prompt, collapsing to a single line" when I press enter. I like that it gives me a lot of room, but there's some information I find I'm wishing was persisted in my shell history (git branch, previous command execution time for long running commands).
*A history picker on the up arrow*
*Commands are recorded once they finish, and only when they exited cleanly, so typos never clutter the list.*
Where the history is stored? Is it possible to store in single place like user root dir?*
oof. deliberate choice?
Not saying you shouldn't check your scripts, I usually do, I like to know where the files are going in case the installer messes up, but the risks tend to be overstated compared to running the executable itself.
what's left is adding the init command to the shell init script.
i really don't see the point of the install script. the verification it offers is of no value because if the repo is compromised then the install script could be compromised too.
It's more realistic to decide if you trust the source, GitHub user yamafaktory in this case. Then you can ensure that your method of download uses TLS.