From: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:40:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] "git shell" won't work, need "git-shell"
Message-ID: <20080825204023.GA10280@glandium.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0808252015080.24820@pacific.mpi-cbg.de.mpi-cbg.de>

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 08:17:12PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Dmitry Potapov wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we agree that direct calls of libexec stuff should never be part 
> > > of the "official" interface (i.e. not workarounds for deprecated 
> > > usage)?
> > 
> > Agreed. It looks somewhat strange to type the libexec path in 
> > /etc/passwd.
> 
> FWIW I do not agree.  IMNHO libexec/ is just a way to organize executable 
> parts of any software package that are usually not called from the command 
> line.  And a login shell qualifies for that.
> 
> > > Considering that calling the git-shell executable directly is the 
> > > _only_ sensible way of using this interface, it should follow that it 
> > > has to be in /usr/bin, no matter if users type this command or not.
> > 
> > Perhaps, /usr/sbin would be a better place, as it is intended only for 
> > system administration binaries.
> 
> Does it not strike you as odd, then, that "sh" -- by far the most common 
> login shell -- does not live in /usr/sbin/?

But nologin is in /usr/sbin.

Mike