On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 03:02:49PM +0200, Andreas Hanke wrote: > Why do we need these Windows-Linux comparisons? Superuser capabilities > are a genuine UNIX feature. There is nothing "MS Windows-like" in having > an option to grant users certain permissions.
Those options are available. sudoers is just for that. > It shouldn't be the default, of course, but nobody seriously proposes > insecure defaults. sudo exists anyway, so I fail to see the point why > having such an option in the software updater can be a problem. Because it is a job for sudoer, not for the software updater to add such a function. I very much dislike the fact that I am not asked for a pasword when I run updater. If it is not an automated job, I want to enter a root password each time I do something as root. Yes, each and every time. > Educating people how to manage their systems is out of scope in this > discussion IMHO. If someone wants to grant permissions, he will do it > anyway, does it really matter if it's the classical UNIX tool named sudo > or a built-in feature of the software updater? Yes, that does matter. It is not up to the software updater. It is up to root to change sudoers. -- houghi http://houghi.org http://www.plainfaqs.org/linux/ http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html > > Today I went outside. My pupils have never been tinier... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
