Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Re: init files
- X-seq: zsh-users 1715
- From: Sweth Chandramouli <sweth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ZSH Users <zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Re: init files
- Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 21:02:04 -0400
- In-reply-to: <980809150442.ZM21544@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mail-followup-to: ZSH Users <zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <19980809150805.47993@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <980809150442.ZM21544@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sun, Aug 09, 1998 at 03:04:41PM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Aug 9, 3:08pm, Sweth Chandramouli wrote:
> Yes, I did say that, but Greg Badros <gjb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> pointed
> out that I should have said that INTERACTIVE was tested, not NO_RCS.
> He included a pointer to a flow chart:
hmm... i've actually still got both of those messages archived,
and i don't find INTERACTIVE mentioned in either.
> Where do you find that in the man page? My "man zshoptions" under
> INTERACTIVE says, "The value of this option cannot be changed anywhere
> other than the command line."
> } the tests given in the STARTUP FILES section of the manpage
> } for a login shell (-l or -zsh) aren't true for any of my login
> } shells
> How are you determining this? What does "echo $0" at a PS1 prompt show?
that i need to read the manpages better.
i totally misread the part about changing interactive (too many hours
staring at a screen, i guess), and my shell is defined as a login one because
its argv is `-zsh'. i assumed it didn't because of the info in the faq on
changing your shell, which mentioned linking it to -zsh; echo $0 shows that
i am running -zsh, even though i never made that link. does login somehow
invoke the shell and pass it a modified argv?
regardless, here is my revised list of tests for the sourcing of
the various rc files. i'm not including the chart itself--it's at
http://astaroth.nit.gwu.edu/~sweth/geek/zshinit.html if people want to
see it; for those who don't, test one returns [no] if rc files are enabled,
test two returns [no] if the shell isn't a login shell, and test three
returns [no] if the shell isn't interactive. so, do these look right, or
am i missing anything else?
also, while figuring all of these out, a few things occurred to me.
for one, does it make sense for the precedence of `unsetopt RCS' to be
different from that of `setopt RCS' in test one? everywhere else, the
inversions of options seem to have the same precedence as each other.
secondly, is there any way to ensure that an action will be taken for all
users upon logout? since test one is repeated just before sourcing
$ZDOTDIR/.zlogout and /etc/zlogout, any user can just put `set NO_RCS' in
his/her $ZDOTDIR/.zlogin, which is the last RC to be sourced, and avoid
sourcing /etc/zlogout. finally, what is the purpose of the `+i' flag?
`zsh +i' doesn't spawn a non-interactive shell (which would, i would
imagine, immediately exit without some source of input), but instead
spawns a shell where the only option set is SHIN_STDIN, but which is
still interactive (and which ignores PROMPT, it seems).
`unsetopt OPTION' is equivalent to `setopt NO_OPTION' and `unsetopt
NO_OPTION' is equivalent to `setopt OPTION' in terms of precedence.
For example, zsh -f with `unsetopt NO_RCS' in /etc/zshenv will source
/etc/zshenv, $ZDOTDIR/.zshenv, /etc/zshrc, and $ZDOTDIR/.zshrc.
 DEFAULT--rc-enabled shell => [no]
`setopt NO_RCS' called before test => [yes]
`+f' flag present on shell invocation => [no]
`-f' flag present on shell invocation => [yes]
`setopt RCS' called before test => [no]
 DEFAULT--non-login shell => [no]
first character of argv is `-' => [yes]
`+l' flag present on shell invocation => [no]
`-l' flag present on shell invocation => [yes]
`setopt NO_LOGIN' called before test => [no]
`setopt LOGIN' called before test => [yes]
 DEFAULT--non-interactive shell => [no]
stdin is a tty (isatty(0) is true) => [yes]
`-c' flag present on shell invocation => [no]
`-s' flag present on shell invocation => [yes]
`+s' flag present on shell invocation => [no]
`-i' flag present on shell invocation => [yes]
`+i' flag present on shell invocation => [no]
IS Coordinator, The George Washington University
<sweth@xxxxxxx> / (202) 994 - 8521 (V) / (202) 994 - 0458 (F)
Messages sorted by: