In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
Some people, such as myself, use kernel sources outside of portage (I
follow a git repo) and do so as a non-root user. In this case the
kernel tree is not owned by root and the config/compile is easily done
as a non-root user.
If you are super-paranoid.
I agree there's no point in using sudo, but what's the problem? You
don't need to edit the kernel sources merely to build a new kernel. You
can build your kernel outside the tree using for example:
make O=/home/user/kernel/tree/ menuconfig
make O=/home/user/kernel/tree/
This is how I do it,
This was actually a potential risk once upon a time:
Sorry to drift from the topic, but would somebody please explain to me
what a potential risk is? How does it differ from a risk?
A risk is always potential. A potential risk is when you are not sure
if it is a risk at all.
Al
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 10:24 +0200, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
few months ago, I read linux kernel in a nutschell(sic), and the author wrote
we
shouldn't do kernel operations (config and build) as root.
I call bullsh*t. I've been compiling kernels for 17 years and for the
most part have done it
Le Saturday 11 September 2010 11:46:59, Albert Hopkins a écrit :
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 10:24 +0200, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
few months ago, I read linux kernel in a nutschell(sic), and the author
wrote we shouldn't do kernel operations (config and build) as root.
I call bullsh*t. I've been
On Saturday 11 September 2010, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
Le Saturday 11 September 2010 11:46:59, Albert Hopkins a écrit :
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 10:24 +0200, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
few months ago, I read linux kernel in a nutschell(sic), and the author
wrote we shouldn't do kernel operations
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 05:46 -0400, Albert Hopkins wrote:
In a perfect, tidy world we'd all do that. This world, however does
not
exist. Even portage, by default does configure and make as root
(albeit
in a sandbox so it is safe(r).
I suppose one could compile the kernel sources as root
Apparently, though unproven, at 11:46 on Saturday 11 September 2010, Albert
Hopkins did opine thusly:
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 10:24 +0200, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
few months ago, I read linux kernel in a nutschell(sic), and the author
wrote we shouldn't do kernel operations (config and build)
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 11:46 on Saturday 11 September 2010, Albert
Hopkins did opine thusly:
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 10:24 +0200, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
few months ago, I read linux kernel in a nutschell(sic), and the author
wrote we shouldn't do kernel
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:35:58 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
If they are accessible by a user, couldn't a user then edit or add
something that would then cause a security problem? If they can edit
them and no one know it, then root comes along and builds a shiney new
kernel with a
Apparently, though unproven, at 22:28 on Saturday 11 September 2010, Etaoin
Shrdlu did opine thusly:
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:35:58 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
If they are accessible by a user, couldn't a user then edit or add
something that would then cause a security problem? If
On Saturday 11 September 2010 21:28:13 Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
This was actually a potential risk once upon a time:
Sorry to drift from the topic, but would somebody please explain to me
what a potential risk is? How does it differ from a risk?
(Not getting at you, Etaoin; the world is just full
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 23:05:22 +0100
Peter Humphrey pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 21:28:13 Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
This was actually a potential risk once upon a time:
Sorry to drift from the topic, but would somebody please explain to me
what a potential risk
On Saturday 11 September 2010 23:03:14 Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
Makes sense?
Not convinced. Sorry.
--
Rgds
Peter. Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23.
14 matches
Mail list logo
