On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:37:02AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Reco <recovery...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 21:50:23 +0000
> > Tom H <tomh0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Reco <recovery...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yes, but pfexec is not sudo. And privilege-aware Solaris shells are
> >>> definitely not sudo too.
> >>
> >> It might not be sudo but it's the same principle of privilege escalation.
> >>
> >> sudo's simpler to set up so I've yet to work at any Solaris shop where
> >> it hasn't been installed (it's not necessarily used though; I
> >> moonlight at two companies where telnetting as root is the norm...).
> >
> > I agree that sudo is simpler to setup. I disagree that sudo is
> > installed everywhere where Solaris is.
> > Because - it's third-party software. And people don't like to install
> > third-party software ('vendor didn't included it - we don't use it').
>
> Your experience may be different but you can't disagree with what's
> been my experience over many years in many different companies!
Of course I agree with you. You've seen what you have seen, I have no
doubts about that. Of course there are people who use sudo on Solaris,
but - there are people who are not, and who are won't do it. Third-party
status is one of the reasons for it.
Reco.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131028135129.GB23316@x101h
