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 >>>>> <https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-xfree/2014-02/msg00005.html>. >>>> 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. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple