[Novalug] Your SHELL is not in /etc/shells

Christopher Jones christopher.donald.jones@gmail.com
Tue Jul 23 00:37:30 EDT 2013


Point being I suppose that fedora is a bit quicker to change because its a
testbed. That said I think its a great deal more stable then a rolling
release like Arch. I find that it fits my needs perfectly fro a home server
especially since I get a preview of upcoming Red Hat changes.

Either way the moral of this story is read your release notes. If you don't
like an os that changes this much move to Cent or Debian.


On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Peter Larsen <peter@peterlarsen.org> wrote:

>  On 07/22/2013 08:02 PM, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>
> Some may not know that recent Fedora releases have
> merged /bin and /usr/bin.  The executables are in
> /usr/bin and /bin is a symbolic link to /usr/bin.
>
>
> Well, "recent" I guess is relative. I think it was f16 or f17 - sometime
> around then. Here are the details:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>
> In regards to FHS and discussion of what's recommended or not, if you take
> the above link and go to the discussion area you'll find this post:
>
> "The statement "Historically /bin, /sbin, /lib had the purpose to contain
> the utilities to mount /usr" is only one reason for the split. The FHS
> specifies other reasons: http://pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE2.
> The one that sticks out as unaddressed is "Disk errors that corrupt data on
> the root filesystem are a greater problem than errors on any other
> partition. A small root filesystem is less prone to corruption as the
> result of a system crash." This is both helped (the root filesystem will
> indeed be smaller) and hindered (but the root filesystem is essential in
> part because it contains the tools necessary to recover from disk errors...
> which would no longer be the case) by this change.
>
> Additionally, the FHS is not only specifying these directories for purely
> technical reasons but also for organizational reasons. For instance, /bin
> contains "Essential" user command binaries. The section of FHS pointed at
> above would seem to indicate a definition of "Essential" that includes not
> only what's necessary to boot (what this feature is saying is no longer
> necessary) but also the commands necessary to recover, repair, or restore a
> system. The /bin and /sbin split is even more a separation due to
> organization of binaries rather than a need to do that to prevent breaking
> the system.
>
>    - Many of the proposed benefits of this feature, such as "/usr can be
>    read-only and shareable. " are already present in the current /usr. For all
>    such benefits, the benefit is actually that more files are going to be
>    included on /usr (or the inverse, that less will be included on /).
>
> For dependencies, the Feature also needs to make sure that it works for
> the non-programming/library files that are stored in those directories on
> /. For instance, /lib/udev, /lib/systemd, /lib/terminfo.... These may all
> be fine but they need to be considered as dependencies that may need
> changing. We have the compat symlinks"
>
> Given the definition of "large" has changed since FHS came around decades
> ago, I'm not sure it really applies today?
>
>  When I saw this I changed my password file entry to
> show my shell as /usr/bin/ksh, the actual location.
> This field of the password file is used for the
> initial value of SHELL upon login.
>
>
> Not sure how you got there?  Here's my /etc/shells - untouched by me since
> f14 ...
> $ cat /etc/shells
> /bin/sh
> /bin/bash
> /sbin/nologin
> /bin/ksh
> /bin/zsh
>
> These entries are already corrected. Try reinstalling the setup rpm and
> see if things don't reset for you?  These entries match the shell entries
> in /etc/passwd on my side too. I'm not sure if using the symlink location
> should work here - maybe someone with more detailed knowledge of the login
> process will know.
>
>  That edit just bit me when I started  some program
> and it refused to run because my SHELL variable was
> not listed in /etc/shells.
>
>
> Did you log out and back in first? If you changed the location of your
> login shell, I would make sure to restart the session to avoid confusion.
>
>  I'm a little surprised that Fedora only lists /bin/ksh
> and doesn't list both locations in /etc/shells.
>
>
> It shouldn't need to. At least to my knowledge when the migration was
> done, all shell references where automatically changed to the new location.
>
> --
> Regards
>   Peter Larsen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Novalug mailing list
> Novalug@calypso.tux.org
> http://calypso.tux.org/mailman/listinfo/novalug
>
>


-- 
Chris Jones
RHCSA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.firemountain.net/pipermail/novalug/attachments/20130723/7f4934a4/attachment.htm>


More information about the Novalug mailing list