On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:47 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 9:50 AM, David Parsley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I guess I'll file a bug on this, and see if I get a WONTFIX. > > > > For those of you who followed this thread, I did indeed file a bug, > > and here's what I got: > > Bug report (shortened): > > When I specify "firewall --enabled" in a kickstart file, ssh is allowed > even > > without specifying "firewall --enabled --ssh". > > > > Closed as NOTABUG: > > --- Comment #1 from Chris Lumens <[email protected]> 2009-02-12 > > 10:56:56 EDT --- > > Right, this is by design. The reason being that for a lot of the > enterprise > > customers, the only way to get into the machine after installation is via > ssh. > > We don't want to lock people out of fresh installs. This is especially > the > > case on s390 and similarly unusual architectures. It is perhaps a little > > unexpected, but we're definitely doing this for a reason. > > > > > > > ---- > > Stuff like this has come up before, where RH does something to cater > > to the majority of their customers, and the more technical folks on > > this list think it's just crazy. IMO, it's just another case of > > that, and I have a great enough appreciation of Red Hat that I can > > pretty readily overlook this kind of thing. *shrug* > > Thats a jacked up response. At the very least they should change the > documentation AND add a --no-ssh option. Mind if I ask what the bug # was? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485086 Anyway, good point, I'll try to update the bug and make it an RFE. It's pretty silly to document the --ssh flag, and have it be useless - worse, it implies that ssh is closed without it. Regards, David -- David L. Parsley Manager of Network Services, Bridgewater College "If I have seen further, it is by standing on ye shoulders of giants" - Isaac Newton
_______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
