On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Simon Geard <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 17:21 -0500, Chris Staub wrote: >> Pasted from the Note in question: >> >> "You must create a valid /root/.bashrc file to provide a modified path >> for the super-user." >> >> Therefore, to your question of "what" to add to root's .bashrc - it's "a >> modified path." You know, since root generally has additional dirs in >> its PATH (such as /sbin and /usr/sbin). > > Reading that, I think he's actually got a fair point. The intended > meaning is that if you were previously using ENV_SUPATH to give root a > different PATH from ordinary users, you would now need to do so by > modifying root's login scripts. > > But if you read that note, it starts by assuming the reader actually > knows what ENV_SUPATH is, and why it being no longer supported means > they have to create a suitable .bashrc file. If they don't know what > ENV_SUPATH is, they're merely left with a cryptic instruction to create > a .bashrc file with unspecified content. > > And consider, ENV_SUPATH isn't mentioned in the LFS shadow page, and > only mentioned in this page in the context of saying it can't be used. A > typical LFS builder is *not* going to know what that message means. > > A better wording would perhaps be something like: > > Note: The ENV_SUPATH option used to modify root's default path does not > work with PAM. If you are using this option, you'll need to set the path > in root's login scripts instead. > > To me, that explains what it does, and makes it clear that if you don't > use it, you don't need to do anything.
Thanks Simon for making this clear. It had no useful meaning to me the way it is currently written. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
