Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
From: michael-ring AT t-online DOT de (Michael Ring)
To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: setup: icons, shortcuts, and batch files
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:34:56 +0200
Message-ID: <40bomsoidgc1i22ieot4v1ke8jehpepnro@4ax.com>
References: <200007110214 DOT WAA16739 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <6q6mmsof7rf0cr33bed0bsgqejb0ouq7p8 AT 4ax DOT com> <200007111403 DOT KAA15725 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <qlamms4n1bvk0e6erq9o9fbck3l7t6ige8 AT 4ax DOT com> <20000711204901 DOT A31239 AT cygnus DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <20000711204901.A31239@cygnus.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

>Both of those were already created by the older version of setup.exe.
>
>IMO, most of the stuff in your /etc/profile should be established by
>setup.  I don't like the idea of repeatedly checking to see if something
>has been done when it should be done during the setup phase.  That
>slows down bash startup.
>

Yes, you are right. But if there's one change that should definetely
survive, it's the usage of the profile.d directory. This is really
helpfull for integrating x11r6 & other applications.

>The only reason to do this that I can think of is that if the user
>accidentally deletes /etc/passwd, it will be magically restored the
>next time they run bash.  I don't think that that is a strong argument
>for this kind of activity in /etc/profile.
>
>cgf

Agreed, but until now there was no mechanism for this --> that's why
the ended up in /etc/profile. 

The next time I post something like this I will first test it on
Win98, I promise! I saw the postings about the trouble the profile
caused on win98.
This seems to be a lesson that I still have to learn.

Michael