Arch Linux

Currently, /etc/profile is owned by bash package, so other shells should have their own /etc/profile.

I suggest the following:
1) move /etc/skel/.bashrc and /etc/skel/.bash_profile from filesystem package into bash package
2) move these lines from /etc/profile to /etc/skel/.bash_profile:
export PS1='[\u@\h \W]\$ '
export PS2='> '
if [ "$TERM" = "xterm" -o "$TERM" = "xterm-color" -o "$TERM" = "rxvt" -o "$TERM" = "xterm-xfree86" ]; then
PROMPT_COMMAND='echo -ne "\033]0;${USER}@${HOSTNAME%%.*}:${PWD/$HOME/~}\007"'
fi
3) move /etc/profile to filesystem package

The same for /root/.bashrc and /root/.bash_profile

Status?
Will this be changed?

Which other shells try to run /etc/profile?

Isn't "export" itself a bash-specific statement? Or bourne-specific, anyway?

What "dot" files do the various shells use?
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/faq/part5/section-6.html

ksh uses /etc/profile and .profile
Maybe newer versions of other shells too, I don't know.

Anyway I find moving all bash dot-files from filesystem to bash package more logical.


P.S.: What about LANG in /etc/profile? (I wrote about it in my last e-mail message to you)

As I stated in my original message, zsh also uses /etc/profile. Although that page fails to mention it.

and what about simply telling the user "it's up to you to properly amend /etc/profile depending on the shells you are gonna install at your site"? :) the less /etc/ stuff comes with a package, the better, IMO

sorry i meant "the less the /etc stuff that comes..."

Well, look how Suse does it (attached). It looks like, /etc/profile is being read by many shells.
By the way, the /etc/inputrc should also include more stuff (commented maybe, so you can uncomment it if you want) and maybe there should also be a working history where every command is saved only one time. Otherwise the history is pretty unusable since half of the ~/.bash_history file is full of "su -" "ls" and "cd". Only FreeBSD's history is worse... I don't believe that this is against the K.I.S.S. principle.

I wanted to write a feature request now, but I think it also fits in here.

phrakture: i saw you already did some filesystem/bash/xorg-init cleanup. Please fix this one too.

Roman: I'll try. This one is far more complex, and requires lots more testing - but I'll get to it at some point - the other packages were tested by myself, dan, and maybe some other people for a few weeks before I made the move.

what will happen when new bash enters core? is there gonna be an /etc/profile package provided by any other package?
i am asking cause /etc/profile now provides much more than the /etc/profile.bash from bash in testing.
especially sourcing the /etc/profile.d files. the one in testing doesnt have that at all

shell-independent /etc/profile is provided by the filesystem package

@dolby: It is in the filesystem package, but is pending the pacman 3.1 release. There was an issue with pacman 3.0's backup handling when backup files change hands.