Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Sun, 24 May 2009 10:43:36 -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI in gmane.linux.debian.user wrote: Tony Baldwin wrote: You would think, icedove being the brainchild of the debian movement, that it would include this option for users on the debian lists. Não faz sentido... Even if Debian made a patch, it should be sent upstream to be added to the main trunk. It's quite annoying that one of the most used mail readers does not have such a simple feature. (And I use Icedove, so I know how annoying it is to have to hit Reply All and delete other users' emails). Actually this bug has seen a fair bit of activity. I've been following it. Here's s the URL if anyone wishes to read up on the progress; https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45715 -- Regards, S. Fishpaste -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Thu,21.May.09, 14:43:03, Paul Scott wrote: Andrei Popescu wrote: On Wed,20.May.09, 21:09:02, Muzer wrote: Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. There's a reply-to-list extension for Thunderbird. Not counting that the current version of TBird/IceDove crashes for many of us in sid reply-to-list doesn't work in the latest version of TBird. Well, one can always use some other client. Claws-mail is a very good one if you don't like/want mutt. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Thu,21.May.09, 13:46:19, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 01:19:24PM -0700, Ken Teague wrote: Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? In Debian, absolutely nothing since it's a symbolic link to bash... Though by policy /bin/sh should not be assu,ed to be bash. In practice many people do set it to dash (e.g. the U distro). It was a release goal for lenny[1] and it almost made it. Now it has been proposed again for squeeze[2]. I have /bin/sh linked to dash for a long while, and haven't seen any problems. [1] http://release.debian.org/lenny/goals.txt [2] http://wiki.debian.org/SqueezeReleaseGoals Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Andrei Popescu wrote: On Thu,21.May.09, 14:43:03, Paul Scott wrote: Andrei Popescu wrote: On Wed,20.May.09, 21:09:02, Muzer wrote: Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. There's a reply-to-list extension for Thunderbird. Not counting that the current version of TBird/IceDove crashes for many of us in sid reply-to-list doesn't work in the latest version of TBird. Well, one can always use some other client. Claws-mail is a very good one if you don't like/want mutt. Regards, Andrei Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Are you saying that they will if I use mutt? I don't know how to configure mutt for mutliple accounts, and have it currently configured for a different gmail acct with imap. I think I would just make a different muttrc and do something like mutt -F /pathto/other/muttrc, or something...no? /tony -- http://www.photodharma.com art photos | tony baldwin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 13:18 -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 01:53:08AM +0700, Sthu Deus wrote: I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? System accounts and system scripts have traditionally used the Bourne shell for compatibility. So, it's either for legacy compatibility, or because the Debian policy requires it. . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? Neither shell is really secure. FUD[1] ? Shells are intended to let user run arbitrary commands. If one wants to control what program are executed, solutions like SELinux are the correct way to control it. (It's sensible to access ~/.gnupg/secring.gpg from a mail user agent, but certainly not using wget) Want a root account ? see http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ and have [no] fun ;) Even rbash isn't really secure, although it's certainly better than the default...if you can get it to work with your scripts. rbash doesn't help at all. Escaping rbash is as trivial as running : perl -e 'exec(bash)'; Or starting vim, then type: [esc]:set shell=/bin/bash [esc]:shell Regards, Franklin [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Sun, 2009-05-24 at 14:37 +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote: On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 13:18 -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 01:53:08AM +0700, Sthu Deus wrote: I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: Todd, What a heck is that auto-reply thing (below)? Forwarded Message From: Todd A. Jacobs nos...@codegnome.org Reply-to: nospam-confirm-##...@codegnome.org To: fp...@klabs.be Subject: Please confirm your message Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 05:37:30 -0700 This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (TMDA). Your message attached below is being held because the address fp...@klabs.be has not been verified. To release your message for delivery, please send an empty message to the following address, or use your mailer's Reply feature. nospam-confirm-...@codegnome.org This confirmation verifies that your message is legitimate and not junk-mail. You should only have to confirm your address once. If you do not respond to this confirmation request within 14 days, your message will not be delivered. email message attachment, Original Message -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Sun,24.May.09, 08:04:09, Tony Baldwin wrote: Well, one can always use some other client. Claws-mail is a very good one if you don't like/want mutt. Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Because you must use reply-to-list ;) Are you saying that they will if I use mutt? I don't know how to configure mutt for mutliple accounts, and have it currently configured for a different gmail acct with imap. I think I would just make a different muttrc and do something like mutt -F /pathto/other/muttrc, or something...no? The package 'muttprofile' looks interesting, but haven't tried it because I seldom need to send mail from a different account and I use 'set-envelope-from' and edit the 'From:' for that. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Sun,24.May.09, 14:43:56, Frank Lin PIAT wrote: What a heck is that auto-reply thing (below)? [snip] Looks like a challenge-response to me. Quite bad, but on the other hand you did Cc him ;) Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Tony Baldwin wrote: Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Are you saying that they will if I use mutt? Not automatically. But mutt includes a command 'reply to list' (shift+L, I think) that eases replying to the list. Icedove lacks such a command. There is an extension that does that, but it only works for some lucky people. :-) -- I learned to play guitar just to get the girls, and anyone who says they didn't is just lyin'! -- Willie Nelson Eduardo M KALINOWSKI edua...@kalinowski.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Andrei Popescu wrote: On Sun,24.May.09, 08:04:09, Tony Baldwin wrote: Well, one can always use some other client. Claws-mail is a very good one if you don't like/want mutt. Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Because you must use reply-to-list ;) I don't see this as an option in icedove. (I'm copy/pasting in the address to reply to list at the moment). /tony -- http://www.photodharma.com art photos | tony baldwin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: Tony Baldwin wrote: Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Are you saying that they will if I use mutt? Not automatically. But mutt includes a command 'reply to list' (shift+L, I think) that eases replying to the list. Icedove lacks such a command. There is an extension that does that, but it only works for some lucky people. :-) You would think, icedove being the brainchild of the debian movement, that it would include this option for users on the debian lists. Não faz sentido... /tony -- http://www.photodharma.com art photos | tony baldwin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Tony Baldwin wrote: You would think, icedove being the brainchild of the debian movement, that it would include this option for users on the debian lists. Não faz sentido... Even if Debian made a patch, it should be sent upstream to be added to the main trunk. It's quite annoying that one of the most used mail readers does not have such a simple feature. (And I use Icedove, so I know how annoying it is to have to hit Reply All and delete other users' emails). -- Weiler's Law: Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself. Eduardo M KALINOWSKI edua...@kalinowski.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Sun,24.May.09, 09:38:01, Tony Baldwin wrote: Andrei Popescu wrote: On Sun,24.May.09, 08:04:09, Tony Baldwin wrote: Well, one can always use some other client. Claws-mail is a very good one if you don't like/want mutt. Yeah, I've noted this behavior (using icedove). Why don't replies go to the list? Because you must use reply-to-list ;) I don't see this as an option in icedove. (I'm copy/pasting in the address to reply to list at the moment). Ah, ok, I thought you were following this thread. Icedove doesn't have that feature built-in, you have to use an extension. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 01:19:24PM -0700, Ken Teague wrote: Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? In Debian, absolutely nothing since it's a symbolic link to bash... Though by policy /bin/sh should not be assu,ed to be bash. In practice many people do set it to dash (e.g. the U distro). -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best ICQ# 16849754 || friend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 01:53:08AM +0700, Sthu Deus wrote: I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? System accounts and system scripts have traditionally used the Bourne shell for compatibility. So, it's either for legacy compatibility, or because the Debian policy requires it. . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? Neither shell is really secure. Even rbash isn't really secure, although it's certainly better than the default...if you can get it to work with your scripts. As far as compatibility, though, you could set things to ksh if you wanted, and it will probably work most of the time. Most Bourne derivatives are supersets of sh, so requiring sh is mostly just a compatibility thing. -- Oh, look: rocks! -- Doctor Who, Destiny of the Daleks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Andrei Popescu wrote: On Wed,20.May.09, 21:09:02, Muzer wrote: Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. There's a reply-to-list extension for Thunderbird. Not counting that the current version of TBird/IceDove crashes for many of us in sid reply-to-list doesn't work in the latest version of TBird. Paul Scott -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Questions regarding bash and sh.
Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? . Why I see that it works different regarding the set environment (for some sh, for others bash), for, say, autorun scripts such as .profile, bash_profile, if sh links to bash? Thank You for Your time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Thu,21.May.09, 01:53:08, Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? bash is better suited for actual users (persons), but if you write a bash-specific script it won't run under sh. On the other hand, bash can interpret sh scripts without any problem. That's why all scripts should either use only sh features or specifically declare they need bash (keyword: she-bang). . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? Why would you want that? sh is not so good for an interactive shell and you already know it's actually a symlink to bash. . Why I see that it works different regarding the set environment (for some sh, for others bash), for, say, autorun scripts such as .profile, bash_profile, if sh links to bash? bash will behave like sh (more or less) when called through a symlink called sh for compatibility reasons. More info about it in the man page and the info page, see package bash-doc. I have found that wikipedia can provide a good start for such basic questions. If you read the relevant page and don't understand it you could ask specific questions here. You might want to start with http://catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html first though. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? . Why I see that it works different regarding the set environment (for some sh, for others bash), for, say, autorun scripts such as .profile, bash_profile, if sh links to bash? Thank You for Your time. Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. My message was: Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? . Why I see that it works different regarding the set environment (for some sh, for others bash), for, say, autorun scripts such as .profile, bash_profile, if sh links to bash? Thank You for Your time. On most modern systems, sh is pretty much the same as bash (although yours may have sh linked to dash, I'll come back to that later), but in a compatible mode (AFAIK just with things like the prompt changed so it looks more like sh, and it reads different startup scripts, and a few of the POSIX-breaking features are disabled). Sh is basically a general executable that is linked to the bourne-compatible shell of your choice (usually bash, but again, sometimes dash). Bash (Bourne Again SHell) is the actual executable sh links to on most systems, and has probably the most features of all the bourne shells. Dash (Debian Almquist SHell) can sometimes be set instead of bash: this is much faster, but has fewer features. Some poorly-designed shell scripts will fail with systems with sh linked to dash. Other systems (mainly embedded systems) have sh linked to busybox - this has even fewer features, but is used because it has every major tool in one executable. Bash in sh mode is no less secure than bash in bash mode. If yours is linked to dash or busybox, those are likely to be more secure due to the fewer features. But there isn't really much of a difference, so don't worry. As for your last question, see above. Sh-compatible bash loads different startup scripts to bash bash. Hope this helped, Muzer -- -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCS/CM/IT d++ s+:- a C+++ UL+++ P L E--- W+++ N o? K? w--- O+ M-- V- PS PE? Y-- PGP- t+ 5? X- R-- tv+ b++ DI D G++ e- h! !r y --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCS/CM/IT d++ s+:- a C+++ UL+++ P L E--- W+++ N o? K? w--- O+ M-- V- PS PE? Y-- PGP- t+ 5? X- R-- tv+ b++ DI D G++ e- h! !r y --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
On Wed,20.May.09, 21:09:02, Muzer wrote: Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. There's a reply-to-list extension for Thunderbird. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Sthu Deus wrote: Good day. I have noticed that for some users in /etc/passwd the shell environment is set as bash and for some as sh. This has led me to the following questions: . Why is it so, meaning what is the meaning of it? . Do I give more insecure environment to a user setting for him sh instead of bash? In Debian, absolutely nothing since it's a symbolic link to bash... $ ls -l /bin/sh lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 2009-02-27 12:13 /bin/sh - bash $ ls -l /bin/bash -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 700492 2008-05-12 12:02 /bin/bash $ file /bin/bash /bin/bash: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.8, stripped -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Andrei Popescu wrote: On Wed,20.May.09, 21:09:02, Muzer wrote: Damn, I did it again, sending it to one person rather than everyone! I really need to get used to this mailing list lark. There's a reply-to-list extension for Thunderbird. Regards, Andrei Thanks, I'll look that up :) -- -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCS/CM/IT d++ s+:- a C+++ UL+++ P L E--- W+++ N o? K? w--- O+ M-- V- PS PE? Y-- PGP- t+ 5? X- R-- tv+ b++ DI D G++ e- h! !r y --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Questions regarding bash and sh.
Ken Teague writes: In Debian, absolutely nothing since it's a symbolic link to bash... man bash and read the INVOCATION section. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
