This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Cygwin64 ignoring /etc/passwd shell field?
- From: Jim Burwell <jimb at jsbc dot cc>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:45:29 -0800
- Subject: Re: Cygwin64 ignoring /etc/passwd shell field?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <530CAA5C dot 8060505 at cygwin dot com> <530D10B2 dot 7050506 at jsbc dot cc> <20140225215511 dot GB6065 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <530D261C dot 5000403 at jsbc dot cc> <530D2932 dot 5010906 at cygwin dot com> <20140226100712 dot GS2246 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <530E7E8A dot 1070303 at jsbc dot cc> <530E80E7 dot 6060201 at jsbc dot cc> <530E83DC dot 9090109 at lysator dot liu dot se> <20140227002659 dot GA5186 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <20140227002936 dot GB5186 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx>
On 2/26/2014 16:29, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:26:59PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> The common case would be for a shell to show up in /etc/shells. Under
>> Fedora adds the shell to /etc/shells when the shell package is
>> installed. I don't see any reason for us to do anything different.
> Rephrasing that in English:
>
> Under Fedora, shells add themselves to /etc/shells file when they are
> installed.
>
> cgf
>
> --
> Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
> Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
Yep. At least for common shells. If someone is super security
conscious, they can police their /etc/shells file. But the most common
usage would be to simply allow a shell that's installed, since if a
person installed a shell, you can safely presume they want to use it.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple