Bug 8160 - 0.9.3 installer doesnt install /etc/shells
: 0.9.3 installer doesnt install /etc/shells
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: Install
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Installer
: 0.9.3
: Other other
: P2 normal
Assigned To: Cauldron Team
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2005-01-31 19:08 UTC by Andrew Stitt
Modified: 2005-10-21 14:57 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrew Stitt 2005-01-31 19:08:18 UTC
0.9.3 installer doesnt install /etc/shells, this causes problems with programs
that refuse to let you log in without an entry in /etc/shells (such as kdm).
/etc/shells is a fairly standard unix/linux file and should exist for new installs.
Comment 1 Benoit PAPILLAULT 2005-02-01 02:45:06 UTC
Is there a spell installing this file or should the installer take care of it?
How did you create this file in your existing sourcemage system?

Benoit PAPILLAULT
Comment 2 Andrew Stitt 2005-02-01 09:02:58 UTC
a quick grep of /var/log/sorcery/install would tell you that no one owns
/etc/shells, so therefore the old installers must have been putting it there.
Comment 3 Benoit PAPILLAULT 2005-02-01 11:50:20 UTC
1. A quick "gaze from /etc/shells" show me that none of the spells currently
installed on my system own this file. Since you reported the bug, I thought you
knew what spell I should use. That's why I was asking you.

2. Which old installer are you refering to, in order to have a look at it?

Benoit PAPILLAULT, ISO guru

Comment 4 Andrew Stitt 2005-02-01 12:35:30 UTC
I dont know when installers stopped creating /etc/shells, I dont have systems
from every version of the installer to check for you, i have an 0.8 install that
doesnt have it, and a really really old install from 2002 that does, but maybe i
made the file myself and forgot since it was so long ago (i probably thought it
was a bug back then too). Perhaps none of the installers ever created this and
everyone who's used kdm or other programs that check it have been smart enough
to add create it. Just curious is it difficult to add one more file to the list
of untracked /etc files that contains

/bin/bash
/bin/sh

You can always appeal to the mailing list if you dont think the installer should
do this.
Comment 5 Benoit PAPILLAULT 2005-02-01 13:04:09 UTC
I was trying to understand your bug with accuracy. Since none of us knows which
installer creates /etc/shells, we cannot refer to it. I just read the
getusershell man page and it says that an empty /etc/shells is treated like
"/bin/sh + /bin/csh". Thus, /bin/bash is the only difference. It's not difficult
to create this file from the installer.

However, i'd like to know the proper way to generate this file. If its content
is fixed, we could create a spell to hold it (like we do for iana-etc). If its
content is to record shell installed, maybe it should be updated after casting
each of those shells. Since this file is used for security purpose, I'll open a
discussion on sm-discuss.

Benoit PAPILLAULT, ISO guru
Comment 6 Benoit PAPILLAULT 2005-02-05 13:33:11 UTC
OK. The ISO will create a file /etc/shells containing only:
/bin/sh
/bin/bash

Benoit PAPILLAULT, ISO guru
Comment 7 Karsten Behrmann 2005-06-13 12:57:29 UTC
noted this to be fixed in the new installer too
Comment 8 David Kowis 2005-07-31 21:04:22 UTC
is it fixed yet?

-- 
Comment 9 Karsten Behrmann 2005-09-04 14:55:49 UTC
Let's call it fixed.

--