X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s= default; b=CWr0y1QFR5uzR7p4CQ3C2eVFHZM+ZkdXGEWYuYdMWNosD2H8bS1mn w2oIW35uktHYSbf+1h8Xg85Tu8MmXqmnJbEMqET+UMK6oGttMxgKkCgnLYv7UsjC +MI/bQQG7FTfAYt155C+QneHqby1XNqRFLCcG9MJN5EG/TAlNoIN84= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=gBYnEvtbUghDcJUVUeKW6YRcZ6A=; b=yROLG/0eYNp1q/yKxviKP+Vsr7vx NGzUPSY6aVmuBELQgCCye4iPckFeavEQZOpeR/H2diDBZOGicr3gzm7FjnTyzmTp tADOe9aoHmcFtQpj9Q+e3YL2uo/XOqYlQ2KSEfU4Kf14pK4UaHWGzpfwKRy37ARl jE9Eec5ue4sj85g= 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1+kAl+vQTrSjO7gsVIJIgz7 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 19:26:59 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Cygwin64 ignoring /etc/passwd shell field? Message-ID: <20140227002659.GA5186@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <6f9492621546f3eeca905b6281314451 AT mykolab DOT ch> <530CAA5C DOT 8060505 AT cygwin DOT com> <530D10B2 DOT 7050506 AT jsbc DOT cc> <20140225215511 DOT GB6065 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <530D261C DOT 5000403 AT jsbc DOT cc> <530D2932 DOT 5010906 AT cygwin DOT com> <20140226100712 DOT GS2246 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <530E7E8A DOT 1070303 AT jsbc DOT cc> <530E80E7 DOT 6060201 AT jsbc DOT cc> <530E83DC DOT 9090109 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <530E83DC.9090109@lysator.liu.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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 >>>>> . >>>> 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