This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Cygwin64 ignoring /etc/passwd shell field?

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:16:28AM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote:
>On 2014-02-27 01:03, Jim Burwell wrote:
>> On 2/26/2014 15:53, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>> On 2/26/2014 02:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> On Feb 25 18:37, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>>>>> On 2/25/2014 6:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/25/2014 13:55, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>>> On Feb 25 13:52, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> I've noticed after installing an update the Cygwin64 appears to ignore
>>>>>>>> the contents of the shell field in /etc/passwd.  I normally run
>>>>>>>> /bin/tcsh as my shell, and changing this field used to result in any new
>>>>>>>> login shells running tcsh.  Now it just runs bash regardless.
>>>>>>>> Has something changed?
>>>>>>> No.  Works for me.  Do you start `mintty -'?
>>>>>>> Corinna
>>>>>> Interestingly, it works as expected with mintty, but not with xterm,
>>>>>> uxterm, uterm.
>>>>>> Was going to try rxvt, but noticed it's not in Cygwin64.
>>>>>> It also works when I ssh into my cygwin.
>>>>>> So appears to be a problem with xterm and related?
>>>>> Yes, and it's a conscious change.  See
>>>>> <>.
>>>> Weird, I was pretty sure we already have an /etc/shells file installed
>>>> by default.  Apparently not.  So, shan't we add one?
>>>>   /bin/sh
>>>>   /bin/bash
>>>>   /bin/dash
>>>>   /bin/mksh
>>>>   /bin/zsh
>>>>   /usr/bin/sh
>>>>   /usr/bin/bash
>>>>   /usr/bin/dash
>>>>   /usr/bin/mksh
>>>>   /usr/bin/zsh
>>>> The base-files package would be a good place to be.  David?
>>> Well, at least it wasn't a subconscious decision.  :-)
>>> Thanks for the pointer!
>>> I agree.  Every distro should have a default /etc/shells with the
>>> typical shells in it.
>> Or on second thought, the shells themselves should run a post install
>> which add themselves to /etc/shells.
>Really? What if someone doesn't want to allow e.g. /bin/fish for some
>reason (missing from the list btw). It would be terrible to have it
>reappear simply because the fish package was updated.

The common case would be for a shell to show up in /etc/shells.  Under
Fedora adds the shell to /etc/shells when the shell package is
installed.  I don't see any reason for us to do anything different.

So +1 from me on having a per-shell postinstall.  I'm surprised that
we've gotten by without something like this for so long.


Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]