On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 11:51:38AM -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > Norbert> FYI, I filed a bug on ssh, as I think it clearly is a bug. > Norbert> If rsh does this too, then someone who uses is may want to > Norbert> file a bug on it as well.. > > I disagree. This is what ~/.ssh/environment and/or ~/.ssh/rc are for. > > How is this case different from, say, executing a program off a menu > in X? Last time I checked, you also don't get your .profile files > read, _unless_ you source them from your ~/.xsession (which is > precisely what that file is for). The difference is that ssh runs a shell, while X runs a window manager.. Also, X is grophical, so it makes sense to make it a special case. If your .profile prints something to stdout, you wouldnt see it in the X case.. It does not make sense for ssh to have ~/.ssh/environment, and rshd to have ~/rshd/environment (I know that this doesnt actually exist), and for some third service to have a third location. All of these spawn a shell, and the shell already takes care of the environment if started as a login shell.. > The concept of a "login shell" should continue to refer to its > common-sense meaning, rather then inventing a new meaning for it just > for implementation convenience. I'm not sure what you mean. I my interpretation of the meening of login shell is in the bug report: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=159762&repeatmerged=yes "This is wrong, as every login or session (which is what ssh provides) needs to start with a login shell. Once the login shell has configured the environment, subsequent non-login shells can be spawned, and they will inherit the environment. Therefore, when executing commands, a non-ineractive, login shell should be run." Do you have a different idea of what it means? Thanks, Norbert
Attachment:
pgpxN8aoXuWLs.pgp
Description: PGP signature