On Thu 31 May 2007 13:01:34 NZST +1200, Randall R Schulz wrote:
name. Whois springs to mind. I'm not sure what the one in /sbin
does, but it doesn't appear to be at all the same thing that the
one in /usr/bin/ does (which is to look up whois directory
information).
% rpm -q
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-05-30 at 19:11 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
It looks like Sax2 has gone on some kind of a weight-loss program
between versions 2.7 and 8.1.
Or the file has changed name to something more sensible.
- --
Cheers,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-05-31 at 07:13 +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Anyhow, being the only Linux distribution that would do it is a
sufficient reason _not_ to do it.
I find it surprising people fail to see that.
O:-)
No, because it always has had
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 22:13, Pascal Bleser wrote:
...
Anyhow, being the only Linux distribution that would do it is a
sufficient reason _not_ to do it.
I find it surprising people fail to see that.
By that logic, we need only one distribution, since there would be no
justification for
Adding /sbin/ to user's $PATH doesn't lower your security. (because
you're still bound by Linux-user security privileges)
But it will make our systems easier to use. So I vote for making it the default.
--
-Alexey Eremenko Technologov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Adding /sbin/ to user's $PATH doesn't lower your security. (because
you're still bound by Linux-user security privileges)
But it will make our systems easier to use. So I vote for making it the
default.
And it breaks 30
Qua, 2007-05-30 às 22:41 +0200, Pascal Bleser escreveu:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Adding /sbin/ to user's $PATH doesn't lower your security. (because
you're still bound by Linux-user security privileges)
But it will make our systems easier
On 5/31/07, Ricardo Cruz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I think this only makes sense if we go through the sudo
route, like Ubuntu.
Otherwise, just symlink from /bin.
Ohh yes, symlinking from /sbin to /bin can also solve those problems,
of inaccessible utilities.
--
-Alexey Eremenko
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 13:41, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Adding /sbin/ to user's $PATH doesn't lower your security. (because
you're still bound by Linux-user security privileges)
But it will make our systems easier to use. So I vote for making it
the default.
And it
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 15:00, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
On 5/31/07, Ricardo Cruz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I think this only makes sense if we go through the
sudo route, like Ubuntu.
Otherwise, just symlink from /bin.
Ohh yes, symlinking from /sbin to /bin can also solve those
You must do this with care.
My question is why. You could do this with care, and waste man-hours
doing a silly thing that will result in no benefit, or we could go
work in other stuff, right? Make things easier? The people who should
be messing with that in a root shell should know what they
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-05-30 at 15:09 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
I really fail to see a down-side, with the possible exception of the
fact that there are sometimes multiple commands with the same name.
Whois springs to mind. I'm not sure what
* Randall R Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [05-30-07 21:02]:
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 17:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Wednesday 2007-05-30 at 15:09 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
I really fail to see a down-side, with the possible exception of
the fact that there are sometimes multiple commands
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 18:27, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Randall R Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [05-30-07 21:02]:
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 17:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Wednesday 2007-05-30 at 15:09 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
I really fail to see a down-side, with the possible
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Wednesday 30 May 2007 13:41, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Adding /sbin/ to user's $PATH doesn't lower your security. (because
you're still bound by Linux-user security privileges)
But it will make our
Jonathan Arsenault wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-26 at 02:35 +0300, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Anyways, I'm not satisfied. I want to have access to my ifconfig from
normal user.
Yes, lets change the UNIX way for the unsatisfied kid ...
Snip from the FHS.
/sbin : System binaries
Purpose
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 09:08 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Jonathan Arsenault wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-26 at 02:35 +0300, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Anyways, I'm not satisfied. I want to have access to my ifconfig from
normal user.
Yes, lets change the UNIX way for the unsatisfied kid ...
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 09:08 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Jonathan Arsenault wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-26 at 02:35 +0300, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Anyways, I'm not satisfied. I want to have access to my ifconfig from
normal user.
Yes, lets change the UNIX way for the unsatisfied kid ...
So what? That doesn't tell anything about whether it makes sense to have
sbin
in $PATH. I'd vote for appending sbin to regular users' $PATH by default.
There
are many tools in sbin that can be called as user to display at least some
status information (or even just the help text). The
Jonathan Arsenault wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 09:08 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
I'd vote for appending sbin to regular users' $PATH by default. There
are many tools in sbin that can be called as user to display at least some
status information (or even just the help text). The clueless
On 29/05/07, Ludwig Nussel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The question was not whether the file system layout as we know it
still makes sense but whether non-root users would benefit from
quick access to sbin binaries by default. Changing the default[1]
PATH is the probably the most simple way to
On Sat, 2007-05-26 at 03:38 -0400, Jonathan Arsenault wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-26 at 02:35 +0300, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
Anyways, I'm not satisfied. I want to have access to my ifconfig from
normal user.
Yes, lets change the UNIX way for the unsatisfied kid ...
Snip from the FHS.
/sbin
On 24/05/07, Alexey Eremenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all !
Basic utilities such as ifconfig do not work under user account, but
only under root.
ifconfig has been deprecated for years and only still included so that
scripts don't break afaik.
Use ip which is in the normal users' path and
Benji Weber wrote:
On 24/05/07, Alexey Eremenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all !
Basic utilities such as ifconfig do not work under user account, but
only under root.
ifconfig has been deprecated for years and only still included so that
scripts don't break afaik.
Use ip which is in the
This doesn't preclude adding sbin to users' path for other reasons though.
/sbin/ifconfig works most of the time, when IP never works without
obscure options...
this argument is beyond silly... ip a show the same infos as ifconfig.
Time for you to start reading some documentation.
25 matches
Mail list logo
