On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 03:09:37PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 12:41:17PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
Which procedure? You seem to know something I don't know. (Overwrite
means in my context: chmod of static devices or a MODE
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:35:00AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
I'm trying to ask why you are unwilling to have devmapper disks provide
a default of root.disk 660? Why can't you allow that to be the default?
You can always make permissions less strict, you can't make them more
strict, as the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:35:00AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Is there some reason you can't have implement your personally preferred
policy of root.root 600 on just your own system? Is there some reason
* Bastian Blank ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Is there some reason you can't have implement your personally preferred
policy of root.root 600 on just your own system? Is there some reason
for projecting your personal policies incompletely onto an arbitrary
subset of debian's users?
Hu? 10
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:47:26PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Here's what I currently see suggested:
1) change devmapper defaults -- patch rejected, no reason given
2) explicitly use udev -- problem, this doesn't work for 2.4 kernels
(2.4 used devfs)
3) avoid using devmapper (but this is not a
5 matches
Mail list logo
