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

Re: *term -ls, a summary

On Fri, 19 Jul 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> >>"Clint" == Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org> writes:
>  >> Why?  Opening an xterm for interacting directly with a shell is IMHO
>  >> functionally the same as opening an VC.  And I am really pissed off if
>  >> I don't get a login shell and the profiles aren't sourced.  It's different
>  >> of course if you open the xterm to run a program which is not a shell.
>  Clint> In what situations, then, do you have/want an interactive shell that is
>  Clint> not a login shell?
> 	Every single xterm I open which apart from the initial
>  term. My bash init scripts to different things for login shell,m and
>  I do not need these executed whenever a xterm is opened.

If you don't want some things to be run in an xterm you can simply wrap
them with if [ -z "$DISPLAY" ]; then stuff to do only i a VC; fi

> 	There is a reason for having this distinction, you know. You

Yes, I know.  The reason is in short, that you can set up things like
fancy prompts for interactive use and not having them wreak havoc in shell
scripts.  But the current default configuration of menues/buttons defeats
the intended benefit of this distinction.  Because, if you wanted things
to work in an xterm without changing the menues, you'd have to put them
into .bashrc where they are executed for non-interactive shells also.

>  can correctly configure your environment to actually use the
>  facilities provided, as some of us have done.

I have fixed my environments too, but as I have again set up a new system
and recognized that the default is still broken, I finally decided to do
something about it.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: