Ove Kaaven wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, David Elliott wrote:
>
> > ACK, run wine as root??
>
> No, not anything important as root! Just run installers that are for
> system-wide usage while running as root, or using a different account if
> the administrator is paranoid enough. See what I wrote at
> http://www.winehq.com/News/2000-25.html#FTR to see what I mean - I
> explicitly say "administrator's account", *not* root (except in the
> coverage of what tools/wineinstall does by default, but the admin is free
> to do it manually with a different account, since it's explained clearly
> what to do). And there's a warning at the bottom warning against using the
> administrator account for anything other than installing.
Okay, so by "root" you just meant the wine administrator account, and not
necessarily the real root account
Actually, I think the default should be to add a wine administrator account
and making all the registry stuff owned by that account. Of course maybe
that is more of a packaging issue like for RPMs and stuff. Personally,
I feel that the default configuration should always be secure and should lend
itself to keeping the system secure. Making the would-be admin do more work
to secure the system is not a good idea.
Of course, like I said in the other e-mail (reply to Juergen) we should
really get a good RPM .spec into CVS (much like the gnome stuff does). It
would solve a lot of PEBCAK problems if users only need to rpm -Uvh
wine-VER.i386.rpm and it would automagically come up with reasonable
defaults. I would say reasonable defaults would mean no windows installation
required at all. Also, if we have a .spec in the source tree then users can
rpm -ta wine-REL.tar.gz to build the rpms.
-Dave
