DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	 q=dns; s=default; b=UKEb0We9MxglFfbqbARkKgO2E6gntrrlJDxdJLwb7Zz
	fnBPCwnTOkyzbV0hGQzNXQv9eCRjjaV2Yj8DE3iuDWmbmTJmMNO6yarUwLzIo4zr
	nJ8EHbqfoiVbMfnMSIA1syaarGaHXgHXVypMfnL97JmELhTGtkG3TWFVOEHAR0p8
	=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Message-ID: <530E8AA9.7080502@jsbc.cc>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:45:29 -0800
From: Jim Burwell <jimb@jsbc.cc>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Cygwin64 ignoring /etc/passwd shell field?
References: <530CAA5C.8060505@cygwin.com> <530D10B2.7050506@jsbc.cc> <20140225215511.GB6065@calimero.vinschen.de> <530D261C.5000403@jsbc.cc> <530D2932.5010906@cygwin.com> <20140226100712.GS2246@calimero.vinschen.de> <530E7E8A.1070303@jsbc.cc> <530E80E7.6060201@jsbc.cc> <530E83DC.9090109@lysator.liu.se> <20140227002659.GA5186@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20140227002936.GB5186@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
In-Reply-To: <20140227002936.GB5186@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2/26/2014 16:29, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:26:59PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 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.
> Rephrasing that in English:
>
> Under Fedora, shells add themselves to /etc/shells file when they are
> installed.
>
> 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
>
Yep.  At least for common shells.  If someone is super security
conscious, they can police their /etc/shells file.  But the most common
usage would be to simply allow a shell that's installed, since if a
person installed a shell, you can safely presume they want to use it.

--
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