Re: .bash_profile, the empty /etc/skel, and the first user
'Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:'
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>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
email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org | 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