From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#29337: Bash reads system-wide bashrc unconditionally. Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:19:46 +0100 Message-ID: <87zi6p1jwt.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878tf5ksmq.fsf@gnu.org> <87o9o039cb.fsf@gnu.org> <87mv3gsjt6.fsf@gnu.org> <8760a4nhhi.fsf@gnu.org> <87fu93n0jr.fsf@gnu.org> <878tev9z8t.fsf@gnu.org> <87tvwxqyzf.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60211) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOO05-00087d-R9 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:20:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOO02-00088t-MB for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:20:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:47483) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOO02-00088c-Hr for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:20:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eOO02-0004vf-2Z for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:20:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87tvwxqyzf.fsf@gnu.org> (Roel Janssen's message of "Mon, 11 Dec 2017 12:35:22 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Roel Janssen Cc: 29337-done@debbugs.gnu.org Roel Janssen skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: [...] >>>> Now, we=E2=80=99re compiling Bash with "-DSYS_BASHRC=3D'\"/etc/bashrc\= "'". I >>>> wonder if removing that flag solves the --init-file case. >>> >>> It does. So, I have a custom bash package for my specific use-case. >>> I'm not sure how it affects other functionality, but I would like it if >>> we could make this change upstream at some point. >> >> Now=E2=80=99s the time to make that change in =E2=80=98core-updates=E2= =80=99! >> >> I don=E2=80=99t think it breaks things on GuixSD because /etc/profile so= urces >> /etc/bashrc anyway. >> >> Thoughts? > > I don't think it'll break things. So I guess I'm too late for the > core-updates cycle. Yes. > Should I push this change to core-updates for the next cycle? You can create a =E2=80=98core-updates-next=E2=80=99 branch based on =E2=80= =98core-updates=E2=80=99, or wait until =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99 has been merged (which could take= at least two weeks.) Ludo=E2=80=99.