Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:34:22 -0600 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "Wojciech A. Koszek" <wkoszek@freebsd.czest.pl> Subject: Re: Enhancing the user experience with tcsh Message-ID: <CACxBGJMtn1meu8kAofFFVzRQzU%2BOw9VjosUiWcM_CfvWYDkyww@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgnBGM8_sLcnmjvOKDnXSK-3rnfVJsy-RomTZwwpRCWDbw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAF6rxgnebQUY8azv8fovQPkB%2BGgsQjaByZ6JwnNWjrM1hB65eQ@mail.gmail.com> <1328887627.38277.68.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <CAF6rxgmjQX%2B8hZVdjYBHJfonegavYhY_22gyVszpPvxhAKbvTA@mail.gmail.com> <CACxBGJN0=qKgg1Q58o0dp_1eRbc6VhOfT-4LV0_ELbCfeVpsFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAF6rxgnBGM8_sLcnmjvOKDnXSK-3rnfVJsy-RomTZwwpRCWDbw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> wrote: >> Personally, I pay very little attention to the prompt. That being said..= . >> Plenty of people prefer widely different configurations for the prompt. >> I think everyone agrees that the default prompt isn't particularly >> informative, however, achieving consensus here is going to be almost >> impossible. I suggest that it be handled as a seperate discussion, >> perhaps? > > That would result in even more of a bikeshed than this thread. I'm > pretty sure I'm going to go with one of the prompts posted to this > thread after a bit of experimentation. > Remember that the prompts are for inexperienced users and those of you > with awesome prompts are not the target audience for the change. I'm not actually against any of the prompts that have been suggested. They're all fine with me. I use too many shared machines, or use machines temporarly to expect anything at all from the prompt anyway. > >> I am against this change, barring a more compelling reason to include >> it. Default behavior limits $PATH to areas that are only writable as >> root, and there is no garuntee that $HOME can only be written by the >> user. As a result, the change may create unanticipated and unnoticed >> security consequences some installations. I believe this outweighs the >> functionality provided by the proposed change, given how trivial this >> is to configure after the fact. > > =A0set path =3D (/sbin /bin /usr/sbin /usr/bin /usr/games /usr/local/sbin > /usr/local/bin $HOME/bin) > > is the default > Whoops. I should have known a couple of years ago that adding a handful of random patches to my build machine wasn't a great idea.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACxBGJMtn1meu8kAofFFVzRQzU%2BOw9VjosUiWcM_CfvWYDkyww>