On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:30 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
> It only takes a second or two and then /etc/shells will be back to normal.
But the damage is already done and before you figure this out your
things will get broken in a really subtle way (such as brigthness keys
not working in xfce).
Anyway
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 21:27 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:54:54 -0800, JR (Jonathan) wrote:
>>
>> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15725
>> > >
>> > > Read through the comments.
>> >
>> >
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 21:27 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:54:54 -0800, JR (Jonathan) wrote:
>
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15725
> > >
> > > Read through the comments.
> >
> > What *should* be in /etc/shells (by default)? Reading the commen
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:54:54 -0800, JR (Jonathan) wrote:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15725
> >
> > Read through the comments.
>
> What *should* be in /etc/shells (by default)? Reading the comments
> gives many examples of bad /etc/shells but no example of a good one.
On 11/15/2011 11:54 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> What*should* be in /etc/shells (by default)? Reading the comments
> gives many examples of bad /etc/shells but no example of a good one.
Here's mine, from F14:
/bin/sh
/bin/bash
/sbin/nologin
/bin/zsh
/bin/tcsh
/bin/csh
/bin/dash
--
users maili
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 20:31 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:49:32 +0100, MB (Maciek) wrote:
>
> > A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
> > wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
> > breaking pkexec.
>
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:49:32 +0100, MB (Maciek) wrote:
> A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
> wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
> breaking pkexec.
> Anyone else seeing this or am I barking at the wrong tree here?
http
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Maciek Borzecki
wrote:
> A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
> wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
> breaking pkexec.
> Anyone else seeing this or am I barking at the wrong tree here?
Mi
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:49:32 +0100
> Maciek Borzecki wrote:
>
>> A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
>> wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
>> breaking pkexec.
>> Anyo
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:49:32 +0100
Maciek Borzecki wrote:
> A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
> wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
> breaking pkexec.
> Anyone else seeing this or am I barking at the wrong tree here?
P
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Tim Evans wrote:
> I have the same update, and /etc/shells is intact:
>
> /home/tkevans $ cat /etc/shells
> /sbin/nologin
> /bin/dash
> /bin/tcsh
> /bin/csh
> /bin/ksh
Are you certain? I don't see bash here, neither sh.
maciek
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fe
On 11/15/2011 01:49 PM, Maciek Borzecki wrote:
> A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update
> to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells,
> leaving only nologin and dash behind, breaking pkexec.
> Anyone else seeing this or am I barking at the wrong tree here?
I have the sa
A recent bash (that's my suspicion) update to bash-4.2.10-5.fc16.i686.rpm
wiped 'almost clean' my /etc/shells, leaving only nologin and dash behind,
breaking pkexec.
Anyone else seeing this or am I barking at the wrong tree here?
Cheers,
--
Maciek Borzecki
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedora
13 matches
Mail list logo
