Re: sh(1) and ksh(1) default PATH

[mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost (Michael van Elst)]

nia%NetBSD.org@localhost (nia) writes:

>There are a few remaining cases where the sh(1) defaults are Bad:

It's not "Bad" but just does not fit your personal expectations.


>1. We can't assume XDM. Lots of desktop environments have their own
>   preferred login manager which may have inconsistent behaviour
>   and not preserve PATH or editing settings.

If these login managers are inconsistent, then for a reason and
if you want to configure their behaviour than just do that.


>2. There are other situations where login shells are not
>   created, for example, frequently when working with
>   scripts to manage chroots.

And that's fully intentional, in particular _when_ working
with chroots.


>3. There are plenty of ways to mess up creating user accounts
>   (don't pass -m to useradd and create the home directory
>   afterwards) where "why are commands suddenly missing from
>   my shell" is a thing new users can easily stumble into.

I am very sure that users will complain about their missing home
directory first, especially when the other login manager just
bombs out for not being able to write to $HOME/.local.