Ian Balchin wrote: > I wanted to colorise the prompt. Also (down the road) I wanted to > get some colour to joe (they have it yellow and red at the local > university) as it is a bit bland with everything white on black.
This is something that Joe itself must support for it to work. I don't know if it does or not. It's got nothing to do with configuring ls for colour. > What is the difference between the files in /etc , /etc/skel , and > /root ?? Read the 'INVOCATION' section of the bash man page for information regarding the difference between .bash_profile, .bashrc and .profile for login/non-login shells. > /root/.bashrc > /root/.profile shell (bash) config files for the root user > /etc/bash.bashrc > /etc/profile global shell (bash) config files (all users) > /etc/skel/.bash_profile > /etc/skel/.bashrc skeleton config files that are copied to a new account automatically when one is created > Why are some files started with a dot (.) and others not? Files starting with a dot are hidden from a regular 'ls'. > Reading the config-HOWTO (where he gives sample files that are not > the Debian ones) he plainly states in section 4.1 that > > /etc/bashrc (which we do not have) (Not a dot file) and.. > /etc/profile (Not a dot file) > > can be edited for system-wide effects - ie as I understand it, > root and all users will be affected by these settings unless they > are elsewhere modified (like a user editing ditto-named files in > his $home directory. That is correct. If you don't have these files, you can just create them yourself. > He implies in section 4. (and instructs at the very end in 4.15) > that when finishing editing the _dot_ files that they are to be > copied to /etc/skel . What for? Do they need to be there to be > found, or is that a place for safe-keeping? And do they get copied > as plain files or dot files? Copying them to /etc/skel will ensure that new accounts inherit the changes automatically. They get copied with exactly the same filename. Matthew
