bug-bash
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Feature discussion - startup files


From: Fotis Georgatos
Subject: Re: Feature discussion - startup files
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 03:46:22 +0000

Hi,

I much align to Piotr's approach to this. And I'd reiterate his important question: "How much harm can it do?"
Well, really, if there is a counter argument to inventing such a hook, please put it forward now, because it needs to be considered.

I wish config-top.h or configure would be a solution, yet asking all vendors to tune to it, sounds like an exercise in vain;
meanwhile, they would be more willing to receive a new feature from upstream bash, which is optional and does no harm.

tia for your time,
F.


On 21 December 2015 at 21:43, Piotr Grzybowski <narsil.pl@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey,

 As an administrator, when I faced this issue I usually used some
wicked sourcing in standard bash startup files to get one global file
that gets sourced by default (last time I wanted one per group of
users, etc).
 It would be useful; at least for me. How much harm can it do? If the
file is no existent, the behaviour is unchanged. There is no
significant performance impact. If it is plainly mentioned in the man
I have no problem with enabling it by default.
 Personally I think that the list should be used to propose the new
features, and ask for them. When the maintainer is being approached
and then he approaches the list it may stop some (not all ;-)) to
shout "what a stupid idea that is".

sincerely,
pg


On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> wrote:
> I've been approached by some HPC system administrators (who have the
> unenviable task of supporting thousands of users) who have requested a
> new feature in bash: a system startup file with a fixed name (e.g.,
> /etc/bashenv) that is sourced by every instance of bash.  The initial
> request was for something sourced by every interactive shell, but the
> presence of batch systems in the HPC environments prompted the request
> for this kind of startup file for non-interactive shells as well.
>
> The current configurable startup file options are insufficient for their
> purposes because they can be enabled or disabled by vendors, and these
> folks would rather not modify the "vendor" parts of the system.  In some
> cases, with some Linux distributions, doing so voids their support.
>
> My position is that a feature like this is not popular enough to be made
> the default, and the way to move forward and make something like it
> available is to make it a configurable option.  The standard way to do
> that is to make it an option in config-top.h, but it could be settable
> using configure.
>
> I'm interested in hearing what other folks think about the issue, and
> the shell configuration challenges system administrators face in general.
>
> Chet
> --
> ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
>                  ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
> Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
>



--
echo "sysadmin know better bash than english"|sed s/min/mins/ \
  | sed 's/better bash/bash better/' # signal detected in a CERN forum


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]