From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 1 14:26:33 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F41916A420 for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 14:26:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd001@freeode.co.uk) Received: from mail.freeode.co.uk (mail.freeode.co.uk [87.127.24.125]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9501313C4E1 for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 14:26:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd001@freeode.co.uk) Received: from asus.freeode.co.uk ([10.10.10.10]) by mail.freeode.co.uk (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id lB1EQVlq064397 for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 14:26:31 GMT (envelope-from freebsd001@freeode.co.uk) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 14:26:31 +0000 From: John Murphy To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20071201142631.67f3cc7e@asus.freeode.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20071201134611.GA1533@torus.slightlystrange.org> References: <20071201044427.38bd2c84@asus.freeode.co.uk> <20071201131526.GA32885@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <20071201134611.GA1533@torus.slightlystrange.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: What's the point of the shell choice in single user mode? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 14:26:33 -0000 On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:46:12 +0000 Daniel Bye wrote: > On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 02:15:26PM +0100, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 04:44:27AM +0000, John Murphy wrote: > > > I've just successfully done the world and kernel upgrade from 7 beta2 > > > to beta3. I've always had a mergemaster phobia, but it didn't seem too > > > bad this time. I thought I'd broken it after choosing /bin/tcsh as my > > > shell in single user mode. It grumbled about termcap (I think) and > > > then gave me a "simple shell" with a % prompt. > > > > > > fsck and mount were unknown commands and even though I could change > > > directory to /usr or /home they were (apparently) empty! Scary! > > > I now realise it was because they were not mounted of course. > > > > > > I'll know to always accept the suggested /bin/sh in future, but I was > > > wondering if the only reason a choice of a different shell is offered > > > is to scare the unwary. > > > > On possible scenario is that /bin/sh has - somehow - been corrupted, deleted > > or otherwise made unusable. In that situation it is very nice to be able to > > choose some other shell so you can at least try to fix the problem. > > And some individuals even seem to prefer [t]csh over sh! I know, what's > that all about? ;-P (runs to a safe distance to watch the fireworks...) > > John - you would have had the same experience had you selected sh - > only the root file system is mounted if you come up into single user, > which is why the installworld instructions tell you to mount all your > other local file systems. As for fsck and mount being unknown, I suspect > that's due to a very conservative initial PATH under tcsh, but as I > don't use it, I don't know for sure. And the termcap grumble is > because /etc/termcap is actually a symlink to /usr/share/misc/termcap, > which on your system is evidently not on your / fs. Ah, that explains it. /usr is indeed elsewhere ad4s2f in fact. [t]csh always gets my vote. (The government still seems to win though) :) -- Thanks, John.