Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
> My question is pretty simple: is editing the /etc/profile the > recommended way to get my ~/.bashrc file sourced? I say: no. > And if not, > what is. > > It should be noted that I found a message by Gary R. Van Sickle > suggesting that .bash_profile might be a better way to do things, > but this doesn't directly answer my question. Yeah, well, that guy doesn't know what the heck he's talking about half the time ;-). Here's how I have things set up, and I recommend it to everyone; it seems to be the way bash was intended to work, and I can't see any flaws in the scheme: 1. /etc/profile does not source any .bash* files. It does do a bunch of things like "USER="`id -un`"", set the HOME var, and runs any scripts in /etc/profile.d/ (not entirely sure what that's about), all of which was setup by setup.exe. 2. .bashrc is empty. 3. .bash_profile sources .bashrc (just in case, for future use), and then contains all my env var settings, aliases, etc. 4. PATH is *not* set in any of these files, but rather in the normal Windows way (control panel on NT+, ??? on 9x). So what you get with all this is: 1. PATH is always good, whether you're running cygwin apps from bash or the Windows "command line", and regardless of how bash is invoked (interactive/login or not). 2. When you start bash (interactively, your shell), it runs /etc/profile and sets up the bare minimums and cd's to HOME. 3. After runing /etc/profile, bash looks for ~/.bash_profile and runs it to set up your user stuff. 4. Subshells end up sourcing nothing (no BASH_ENV is defined anywhere), so scripts run faster. 5. Interactive but non-login shells run an empty .bashrc. I don't know when you'd get an interactive but non-login shell, but I haven't noticed any problems to date. -- Gary R. Van Sickle Braemar Inc. 11481 Rupp Dr. Burnsville, MN 55337 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
Wow. That was allot of discussion and conjecture on this topic. Did anyone
think of looking at the GNU bash documentation before posting?
http://www.lns.cornell.edu/public/COMP/info/bash/bashref_7.html#SEC65
Seems to me this answers the question quite well about where this kind of
check is recommended. And no post was required to get the information. ;-)
BTW, the check was removed from /etc/profile because bash is not the only
shell that reads that file.
Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX
At 01:52 PM 3/26/2002, David Means wrote:
>I believe that .bash_login, .bash_profile or .profile is the file
>you're wanting to use in this instance.
>
>man bash
>{ snip }
>
> When an interactive shell that is not a login shell is
> started, bash reads and executes commands from ~/.bashrc, if
> that file exists. This may be inhibited by using the --norc
> option. The --rcfile file option will force bash to read
> and execute commands from file instead of ~/.bashrc.
>
>{ snip }
>
>If you're realling wanting .bashrc to be sourced on a login-shell, then
>you'll either need to set BASH_ENV=$HOME/.bashrc, or source it from your
>$HOME/.profile, or from /etc/profile.
>
>David
>
>
>
>On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 11:37, Roland Glenn McIntosh wrote:
> > I just did a recent brand new install yesterday and I noticed that /etc/profile no
>longer contains a line like:
> >
> > test -f ./.bashrc && . ./.bashrc
> >
> > It took me a second to figure out why .bashrc wasn't getting read (I thought it
>happened automatically by the shell) until I compared it to an older "working" cygwin
>install.
> >
> > Is there a specific reason for that missing line in /etc/profile, or could it have
>been an oversight? I did notice that my redhat 7 system's /etc/profile doesn't seem
>to include such a line.
> > -rgm
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> > Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
>--
>
>The Meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything:
>10x + 5x - 35 = x + 7
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
I believe that .bash_login, .bash_profile or .profile is the file
you're wanting to use in this instance.
man bash
{ snip }
When an interactive shell that is not a login shell is
started, bash reads and executes commands from ~/.bashrc, if
that file exists. This may be inhibited by using the --norc
option. The --rcfile file option will force bash to read
and execute commands from file instead of ~/.bashrc.
{ snip }
If you're realling wanting .bashrc to be sourced on a login-shell, then
you'll either need to set BASH_ENV=$HOME/.bashrc, or source it from your
$HOME/.profile, or from /etc/profile.
David
On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 11:37, Roland Glenn McIntosh wrote:
> I just did a recent brand new install yesterday and I noticed that /etc/profile no
>longer contains a line like:
>
> test -f ./.bashrc && . ./.bashrc
>
> It took me a second to figure out why .bashrc wasn't getting read (I thought it
>happened automatically by the shell) until I compared it to an older "working" cygwin
>install.
>
> Is there a specific reason for that missing line in /etc/profile, or could it have
>been an oversight? I did notice that my redhat 7 system's /etc/profile doesn't seem
>to include such a line.
> -rgm
>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
--
The Meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything:
10x + 5x - 35 = x + 7
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
I searched the archives and found a note from Larry suggesting that I review the archives for 12-03-2001. I did this for all of Nov, Dec, and Jan and did not find at least two mentions of the problem as he suggested. My question is pretty simple: is editing the /etc/profile the recommended way to get my ~/.bashrc file sourced? And if not, what is. It should be noted that I found a message by Gary R. Van Sickle suggesting that .bash_profile might be a better way to do things, but this doesn't directly answer my question. -rgm At 12:02 PM 03.26.2002 -0500, you wrote: >IIRC, if you check the archives, you should find that the behavior of sourcing the >.bashrc file in /etc/profile was discontinued in later cygwin releases. The fact that >you have it from over a year ago is probably because the cygwin install does not >overwrite files that have been modified or exist previously. > >HTH, >Peter > >>> >>>I just did a recent brand new install yesterday and I noticed that /etc/profile no >longer contains a line like: >>> >>>test -f ./.bashrc && . ./.bashrc >>> >>>It took me a second to figure out why .bashrc wasn't getting read (I thought it >happened automatically by the shell) until I compared it to an older "working" cygwin >install. >>> >>>Is there a specific reason for that missing line in /etc/profile, or could it have >been an oversight? I did notice that my redhat 7 system's /etc/profile doesn't seem >to include such a line. >>>-rgm -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
IIRC, if you check the archives, you should find that the behavior of sourcing the .bashrc file in /etc/profile was discontinued in later cygwin releases. The fact that you have it from over a year ago is probably because the cygwin install does not overwrite files that have been modified or exist previously. HTH, Peter Randall R Schulz wrote: > Roland, > > My /etc/profile contains exactly the line you quote. It is the last line > of that file, immediately following a "cd $HOME" command. This file > bears the modification date May 10, 2001. It may be a coincidence, but > that's right when I installed Cygwin for the first time on what was then > a new, "clean" Windows 2000 Professional installation on this disk. > > Randall Schulz > Mountain View, CA USA > > > At 08:37 2002-03-26, Roland Glenn McIntosh wrote: > >> I just did a recent brand new install yesterday and I noticed that >> /etc/profile no longer contains a line like: >> >> test -f ./.bashrc && . ./.bashrc >> >> It took me a second to figure out why .bashrc wasn't getting read (I >> thought it happened automatically by the shell) until I compared it to >> an older "working" cygwin install. >> >> Is there a specific reason for that missing line in /etc/profile, or >> could it have been an oversight? I did notice that my redhat 7 >> system's /etc/profile doesn't seem to include such a line. >> -rgm > > > > -- > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: .bashrc not getting sourced?
Roland, My /etc/profile contains exactly the line you quote. It is the last line of that file, immediately following a "cd $HOME" command. This file bears the modification date May 10, 2001. It may be a coincidence, but that's right when I installed Cygwin for the first time on what was then a new, "clean" Windows 2000 Professional installation on this disk. Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA At 08:37 2002-03-26, Roland Glenn McIntosh wrote: >I just did a recent brand new install yesterday and I noticed that >/etc/profile no longer contains a line like: > > test -f ./.bashrc && . ./.bashrc > >It took me a second to figure out why .bashrc wasn't getting read (I >thought it happened automatically by the shell) until I compared it to an >older "working" cygwin install. > >Is there a specific reason for that missing line in /etc/profile, or could >it have been an oversight? I did notice that my redhat 7 system's >/etc/profile doesn't seem to include such a line. >-rgm -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
