2011/1/11, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jan 10 19:40, David Sastre wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 06:08:06PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> > On Jan 6 17:04, Andrew Schulman wrote: >> > > > New package available at: >> > > http://www.eco-lution.tv/cygwin/release/base-files/base-files-4.0-2.tar.bz2 >> > > http://www.eco-lution.tv/cygwin/release/base-files/base-files-4.0-2.tar.bz2.sig >> Also, I'd appreciate opinions regarding the guard-like tests in some >> config files, namely /etc/profile, /etc/bash.bashrc, ~/.bash_profile >> and ~/.bashrc. I'm not very convinced about including them. > > Why do we need them? I don't see equivalent tests on Linux...
There aren't, indeed. And re-thinking the idea, those tests are not needed in any of the files but maybe in /etc/bash.bashrc, which is definitely affected by changes in this version of base-files that modify the order in which startup files are read. Its purpose would be avoiding double sourcing of a file, given the following scenario: - a user updates base-files. - base-files' preremove script keeps modified files untouched (which is the correct behaviour). - a user's modified ~./bash_profile still sources /etc/bash.bashrc, when that has already been done by new /etc/profile. One goal here is to define a SYS-level of configuration that does not rely in the existence or content of any USER-level conffile (e.g. ./bash_profile). Related to this, bash-4.1 will have SYS_BASHRC (/etc/bash.bashrc) enabled.