Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:21:01 -0500 (EST)
> Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GW> <<On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:08:20 +0100, "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> GW>
> GW> >   The patch below (against 4-stable but it will probably apply easily
> GW> > to -current) moves /etc/shells to /usr/local/etc/shells.
> GW>
> GW> Bad idea.  No base component (never mind libc!) should hard-code a
> GW> pathname in /usr/local.
>         I'll consider it flamed to death then :)
>         It was intended to prevent port installs having to write in /etc
> without having to change libc/gen, roken and sendmail which I rather suspect
> is also a bad thing to do.
>         Perhaps /etc/shells is the least of all evils here.

There is a difference between a port creating a config file in /etc, and a 
port adding to a standard config file in etc.  The former is a bad idea, 
the latter necessary.

The other solution would be to allow a PATH of shells files, but that seems
rather messy for something this simple.

            "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"

Wes Peters                                                         Softweyr LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to