Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:19:46 -0400 From: Matthew Hunt <mph@pobox.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, Marco Shaw <marco@nbnet.nb.ca>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HELP! no shell Message-ID: <19980602011946.A22507@mstar.astro.psu.edu> In-Reply-To: <19980602141405.J22406@freebie.lemis.com>; from Greg Lehey on Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 02:14:05PM %2B0930 References: <000701bd8db8$a3243580$0a22a10a@ipo10161034010.nbtel.net> <19980602121231.C22406@freebie.lemis.com> <19980602002334.C16221@flarn.dyn.ml.org> <19980602141405.J22406@freebie.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 02:14:05PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote: > >> You shouldn't use bash in single-user mode, since it's dynamically > >> linked and needs the libraries in /usr/lib. Use sh instead, and put > >> this in your .profile: > >> > >> if [ -x /usr/local/bin/bash ]; then > >> exec /usr/local/bin/bash > >> fi [ ... ] > I'm not sure I understand your problem. You do have the choice of > single-user shell--at least csh and sh by default, and any other > statically-linked shell as well. By default, though, bash is > dynamically linked, so it makes more sense to do it this way. To do *what* this way? That is, what problem does the above code solve? The question regarded setting root's login shell to bash. Simply using chpass or whatever to change the shell to /usr/local/bin/bash does so, and has no impact whatsoever on single-user mode. What disadvantage, exactly, do you see to setting the login shell to /usr/local/bin/bash? -- Matthew Hunt <mph@pobox.com> * Stay close to the Vorlon. http://mph124.rh.psu.edu/~mph/pgp.key for PGP public key 0x67203349. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980602011946.A22507>