The original sh sourced .profile on startup. bash will try to source .bash_profile first, but if that doesn't exist, it will source .profile. Note that if bash is started as sh (e.g. /bin/sh is a link to /bin/bash) or is started with the --posix flag, it tries to emulate sh, and only reads .profile. Footnotes: Actually, the first one of .bash_profile, .bash_login, .profile See also: Bash ...
The .profile dates back to the original Bourne shell known as sh. Since the GNU shell bash is (depending on its options) a superset of the Bourne shell, both shells can use the same startup file. That is, provided that only sh commands are put in .profile For example, alias is a valid built-in command of bash but unknown to sh. Therefore, if you had only a .profile in your home directory and ...
It says that the /etc/profile file sets the environment variables at startup of the Bash shell. The /etc/profile.d directory contains other scripts that contain application-specific startup files, which are also executed at startup time by the shell.
You can add it to the file .profile or your login shell profile file (located in your home directory). To change the environmental variable "permanently" you'll need to consider at least these situations:
In /etc/profile.d I got a script called logchk.sh which is meant to send an email to the admin email address via /bin/mail. If someone logs in via ssh user@serveradress this script is properly executed and the email is sent.
I saw these instructions in a book and don't know what the . /etc/profile command does, what is it? Is it the same as source /etc/profile? Linux-specific Java steps On Linux systems, the following
Well I tried your way for creating a custom function of printing it's argument, but even if I add that function in .bash_profile then also I have to do source ~/.bash_profile everytime I open terminal by shortcut Ctrl+Alt+T.
What's the difference and which is better to use when customizing my bash profile? Documentation on the export command is scarce, as it's a builtin cmd. Excerpt from version 1 of my ~/.bash_profil...
If I run source ~/.profile it does get added to my PATH. I definitely don't have a ~/.bash_login or ~/.bash_profile -- so why would bash not read my local .profile? adding in answer to questions: I'm definitely running bash. I haven't edited ~/.profile ever -- it's been there, hanging out, since I set the machine up last year.
My terminal starts a login shell, so ~/.bash_profile is sourced, followed by ~/.profile and ~/.bashrc. Only in ~/.profile do I create the paths entries which are duplicated. To be pedantic, this is the order in which the files that should be sourced are being sourced: Sourced /etc/profile Sourced /etc/bash.bashrc Sourced .bash_profile Sourced ...
