On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 05:26:55PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > - ease of use for new users (no .bashrc to edit) and for the sysadmin > > (there is no way in Unix to set a system-wide env. variable), - > > consistency between a shell into xterm ran by Gnome, a shell made after > > a telnet/rlogin or a console, which have different initialization files. > > You say there's no way in Unix to set a system-wide env variable.Still, > since this is about Debian, wouldn't it be possible to mandate in the > policy that each shell would source a common file that sets up env > variables consistently ? Is there any technical reason that this can't or > shouldn't be enforced by the policy ?
Actually, this is how most other linux distributions work; included with the bash package is a HUGE /etc/bash_profile (or whatever it is called..) that sets a million and one environment variables. It is slow, and from an administrator's point of view, a bit frustrating. Or at least, in *this* administrator's POV... :) I would caution us to stay away from this; it feels like a hack. Why should we make all the shells source a file just to please some silly java toys? It isn't very fun. It also begs the question, do *all* shells need to do this? /bin/sash is intended mostly for system-recovery (from what I have seen of it) and as a result, should probably be exempted from sourcing a file full of environment variables. Should other shells be exempted? While you are correct, using this technique, it is (mostly) possible to have system-wide environment variables -- but I am not sure it is worth the cost. Trust me, it was a huge relief to discover Debian forbid other packages from mucking with the bash rc scripts, and bash didn't include any nonsense for them by default. :) ObDisclaimer: IANADD, IMHO, My$0.02.. -- Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/ Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
