On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:53:50 -0500 "Louis A. Mamakos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: LM> It doesn't seem unreasonable to have a single file with a list of allowable LM> shells. One thing - it is kind of cute having the allowable shells match the mounted shells. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Louis A. Mamakos
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... John Baldwin
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Matt Dillon
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Vadim Belman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Dag-Erling Smorgrav
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax ... sig
- Re: /etc/shells #include syn... Mike Meyer
- Re: /etc/shells #include... Sean O'Connell
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Garrett Wollman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith