>
> For that user the correct place would be in their own profile files.
>>
>
> Lean toward agree, 'if' the users would actually do so.  History proves 
> the vast majority do not.  This is the underlying issue.  We can't make new 
> users who are disinclined to care about learning anything to actually try 
> to learn anything.
>
> Also agree with Graham suggesting running weewx as a non-privileged user, 
> but that's a bigger lift to make happen that I didn't want to suggest.   
> Getting into that would require the pieces of weewx that talk to the /dev 
> device to have appropriate privs to do so, and there might be portability 
> issues there. 
>

yes, I operate under a separate weewx user as well, but  I think this 
started about specific setup.py installs.
It would be relatively easy under specific packaging systems but I imagine 
it gets a bit of a mess covering all options.

Would the simplest option be to make more effort to discourage setup.py 
installs with a few warnings?

On the deb package installs there are wee_xxx wrapper scripts placed in 
/usr/bin so the added PATH complexity is not needed.

 
>
>> If they rely on sudo, then I don't think it sources those extra 
>> /etc/profile.d files.
>>
>
> It's already sourced in in the non-privileged shell you ran sudo from, so 
> that's not an issue.   Tested on multiple variants of linux.
>
>
Debian 10 removed that security hole with the default *securepath* setting.
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weewx-development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-development/58865ccf-ae90-46bf-9607-544294cb3f3an%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to