Shawn Walker wrote: > On 26/04/07, Joseph Kowalski <jek3 at sun.com> wrote: > > DON'T MESS WITH THE MINIMAL DEFAULT PATH. > > As long as that doesn't exclude ucb from being removed, I can agree > with that. Otherwise, I think it would actually *help* matters to > remove it. So far, everyone I asked says that the first thing to do is > to remove /usr/ucb from your path if you're going to do anything > useful with the system...
Erm, the idea was to deliver /etc/skel/local.profile as "empty" file which only has a comment that the admins should edit /etc/profile&co. to define machine-/site-wide defaults. The per-user configuration files (e.g. ~/.profile, ~/.kshrc and ~/.bashrc) are for the _users_ and should only be filled if the users want to do that (and it eliminates the administrative nightmare of dealing with the issue to update the per-user file, too - updating something like 80000 accounts just to deploy new defaults is a _nightmare_ (and some sites even forbid admins to touch user files in such a way...)). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
