Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:34:24 -0600
From:      "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>
To:        Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Cc:        "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steveo@eircom.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch
Message-ID:  <20010129103424.A65461@hamlet.nectar.com>
In-Reply-To: <200101291631.LAA34977@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>; from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:31:32AM -0500
References:  <20010128101349.2c94539f.steveo@eircom.net> <20010128190227.B25222@spawn.nectar.com> <200101291631.LAA34977@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:31:32AM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:02:27 -0600, "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> said:
> > I would rather that a separate configuration file be read, for example,
> > with a list of shells(5) format files to consult.
> 
> I would rather have a single file, located in a directory intended for
> configuration files.  Perhaps we could call it ``/etc/shells'' which
> seems to be popular.
>
> There is no inherent virtue in having (some subset of) configuration
> files on every partition.

Actually I agree: I don't think anything needs to change.  But, if a
`feature' such as this _does_ go in, I don't want it to mean that
there is a `new' format for `/etc/shells'.

-- 
Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010129103424.A65461>