[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why is there . [dot] in default PATH?
- To: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: why is there . [dot] in default PATH?
- From: Jon Kent <jon_(_at_)_littledaemons_(_dot_)_org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:41:38 +0100
- Organization: littledaemons.org
- Reply-to: jon_(_at_)_littledaemons_(_dot_)_org
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 23:09 +0100, Nick Guenther wrote:
> On 4/3/06, Han Boetes <han_(_at_)_mijncomputer_(_dot_)_nl> wrote:
> > Jon Kent wrote:
> > > This one kinda supprised me. When I was looking around by new
> > > 3.8 install I noticed that in /etc/skel/.profile that PATH
> > > contains a . in it, which I found supprising as I've always
> > > assumed that this was not a sensible thing to do. I've taken it
> > > out as I'm not too happy when having the current directory in
> > > the path.
> > As long as it is at the end of your PATH it's not that bad.
> That's good to know. I never even noticed that before. Also: root
> never gets . in $PATH, right?
You right, root does not get the . in the $PATH. Having . in anyones
$PATH is very brain dead and I'm supprised to see it in OpenBSD