Skip to content

Conversation

@seefood
Copy link
Contributor

@seefood seefood commented May 7, 2025

found a few crucial clashes between the fzf and blesh plugins. this should fix them. credits to @akinomyoga for figuring this out.

Lesson of the day: RTFM

Description

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • If my change requires a change to the documentation, I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • If I have added a new file, I also added it to clean_files.txt and formatted it using lint_clean_files.sh.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes, and all the new and existing tests pass.

@seefood seefood self-assigned this May 7, 2025
@seefood
Copy link
Contributor Author

seefood commented May 7, 2025

@akinomyoga think I should add a BATS test here or is this enough?

Copy link
Contributor

@akinomyoga akinomyoga left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@akinomyoga
Copy link
Contributor

@akinomyoga think I should add a BATS test here or is this enough?

I'm not sure how this could be tested. Do you have an idea?

One might consider using expect or pexpect, but the existing tests do not seem to do such a non-trivial thing.

@seefood
Copy link
Contributor Author

seefood commented May 7, 2025

for the record - fzf is still not used by blesh for history nor completion, only when I run it directly such as with the fcd alias. is that the intended result?

@akinomyoga
Copy link
Contributor

for the record - fzf is still not used by blesh for history nor completion, only when I run it directly such as with the fcd alias. is that the intended result?

No, with integration/fzf-key-bindings and integration/fzf-completion, the same features as provided by Fzf's key-bindings.bash and completion.bash are supposed to be available. If they are not available, something is wrong.

@seefood
Copy link
Contributor Author

seefood commented May 7, 2025

No, with integration/fzf-key-bindings and integration/fzf-completion, the same features as provided by Fzf's key-bindings.bash and completion.bash are supposed to be available. If they are not available, something is wrong.

well, it's been broken in bash_it for a while now, and it's not working even without ble.sh. I'll test it on a clean shell without any bash_it and see. it's a separate issue.

so this PR gets a green light?

@akinomyoga
Copy link
Contributor

Let me check the behavior in my environment.

Copy link
Contributor

@akinomyoga akinomyoga left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I tried the ira/pre-release-nitpicks branch in my environment. It's working as expected in my environment.

@seefood seefood merged commit dc25be3 into Bash-it:master May 8, 2025
6 checks passed
@seefood seefood deleted the ira/pre-release-nitpicks branch May 8, 2025 11:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants