I prefer zsh.
Whilst I can retrospectively edit the line from fish back to zsh
'username':*
1002:'username':/home/'useername':/usr/local/bin/zshIs there something in the upgrade process that can preserve my choice of TE?
unsolicited passwd file changes
unsolicited passwd file changes
It seems that OS upgrades force changes to my username entry in passwd file, forcing the TE to fish.
I prefer zsh.
Whilst I can retrospectively edit the line from fish back to zsh
'username':*
1002:'username':/home/'useername':/usr/local/bin/zsh
Is there something in the upgrade process that can preserve my choice of TE?
I prefer zsh.
Whilst I can retrospectively edit the line from fish back to zsh
'username':*
1002:'username':/home/'useername':/usr/local/bin/zshIs there something in the upgrade process that can preserve my choice of TE?
Re: unsolicited passwd file changes
An update should not change anything in passwd. Also, editing /etc/passwd is not best practice. It would be best to use pw or chsh to change the shell.nevets wrote: ↑Sun Oct 29, 2023 9:38 pm It seems that OS upgrades force changes to my username entry in passwd file, forcing the TE to fish.
I prefer zsh.
Whilst I can retrospectively edit the line from fish back to zsh
'username':*
Is there something in the upgrade process that can preserve my choice of TE?
Re: unsolicited passwd file changes
I think some pkg installs seem to effect changes in passwd. Last time I saw this was installing scanner related pkgs I think.
Perhaps there's an artefact somewhere in MATE configuration...?
chsh doesn't seem to update passwd to the new TE which is why I ee the file. Only then does MATE stop using fish.
Perhaps there's an artefact somewhere in MATE configuration...?
chsh doesn't seem to update passwd to the new TE which is why I ee the file. Only then does MATE stop using fish.