X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4F3D6B36.3080500@lysator.liu.se> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 21:46:46 +0100 From: Peter Rosin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120208 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: base-files 4.0-9: LANG is set to the system default, why not the user selection? References: <4F3BBA41 DOT 6050800 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <20120215221458 DOT GA6842 AT jethro DOT local DOT lan> <4F3C99B2 DOT 9000507 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <4F3CD659 DOT 7070109 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <4F3CE52C DOT 70409 AT gmail DOT com> <4F3CFEB0 DOT 3040307 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <4F3D06A9 DOT 5000602 AT gmail DOT com> <4F3D11AF DOT 4090005 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <20120216200538 DOT GA9451 AT jethro DOT local DOT lan> In-Reply-To: <20120216200538.GA9451@jethro.local.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com David Sastre Medina skrev 2012-02-16 21:05: > No need. It looks like I haven't properly understood your complain. Also it > looks like I haven't explain properly what was the thing with setting > 'locale' both system-wide and user-defined. > > For the first, I apologize. WRT the second, here's a new attempt: > 'locale' is set system-wide in /etc/profile.d/tzset.* to provide > a new functionality, that, IIRC, was included in the announcement of > the base-files' release. > Also, 'locale' _can_ be set at a user-defined level, to provide the > user the ability to set 'locale' despite system-wide setting, wich > could be needed in multi-user environments, for instance. (or as in my case, where someone else decided that I should have a non- English version of Windows.) > base-files includes several files that create you $HOME and populate > it with the files under /etc/skel/. After that, if you ever modify > them, further updates won't affect those files, respecting the policy > of not dealing with user modified files (some other distros will > prompt you to either install the package version, keep the installed > version or see the differences, for example). > > The scripts that check for existing files, compare them to the package > version and perform the update if it has to be done are: > > /etc/preremove/base-files.sh > /etc/postinstall/base-files.sh > > Your attached .bash_profile does look unmodified, BTW, so regarding > the fact it wasn't replaced by the update process, I've tried to > reproduce it, unsuccessfully. It works for me. As I understand it, base-files contains the file /etc/defaults/etc/skel/.bash_profile. At installation, /etc/postinstall/base-files.sh copies that to /etc/skel/.bash_profile, if it that file doesn't exist already. Then at uninstall, if /etc/preremove/base-files.sh finds that /etc/skel/.bash_profile is not changed, it is removed (so that an updated package feels free to copy over the new version). Further, when a user *first* logs in, /etc/skel/.bash_profile is copied to ~/.bash_profile by the /etc/profile script. At no other point are files in ~ modified, as I understand it. The way I read your explanation above, you are implying that your ~/.bash_profile is updated along with /etc/skel/.bash_profile, and I simply fail to see where that is happening. It is also counter to the message from /etc/profile (also quoted by Mike): Copying skeleton files. These files are for the users to personalise their cygwin experience. They will never be overwritten nor automatically updated. I.e. my /etc/skel/.bash_profile is version 4.0-9 as I expect, but my ~/.bash_profile is the old 4.0-6 version from when I first logged in, and I see no code anywhere that checks if ~/.bash_profile matches /etc/skel/.bash_profile and updates if it is pristine. So, the question remains, why is your ~/.bash_profile updated when you upgrade the base-files package? Or have I misinterpreted your message again? .bash_profile is of course just an example in this, select any of .bash_profile, .inputrc, .bashrc and .profile. Cheers, Peter -- 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