[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: .bash_profile, the empty /etc/skel, and the first user

'Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:'
>On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> [ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. ]
>> Santiago Vila Doncel:
>> > (3) I don't understand the policy of having /etc/skel totally empty.
>> What useful settings would you like to put there that are not better
>> done elsewhere? Remember, if you add a setting to /etc/skel, then only
>> new users will get it.

I agree nothing is /etc/skel is useful to sysadmins (in general).

>* Alias for colorized ls. This would be commented out, so that any user

I think /everything/ in /etc/skel/.bash* should be commented out.  But
I like the idea of having the comments there.  They serve as
documentation.  I highly valued the suggestions from my first SLS and
Slackware installations (when I was first learning UNIX).  But at this
point, I would hate to have anything in there except comments.  NB,
the comments should /not/ go into /etc/profile!

What do you think (Lars and others):  are lots of comments in
/etc/skel files acceptable?

Of course the bash maintainer would have to be convinced too.

Christopher J. Fearnley            |    Linux/Internet Consulting
cjf@netaxs.com, cjf@onit.net       |    UNIX SIG Leader at PACS
http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf         |    (Philadelphia Area Computer Society)
ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf    |    Design Science Revolutionary
"Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller |    Explorer in Universe

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: