So, in most cases* sudo -s* is better? Any downsides? ср, 26 мар. 2025 г. в 16:10, Greg Wooledge <g...@wooledge.org>:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 07:48:16 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote: > > On 3/26/25 6:55 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > I normally use "sudo -s", which is the closest sudo approximation to > > > the traditional behvior of "su" (before it was broken in buster). > > > > I don't understand the reference to some "brokenness" of "su". > > I've not closely followed this thread so I may be missing context. > > Out of the box, in Debian 1.1 through 9, "su" with no arguments would > give you a root shell with the PATH variable changed to include > /usr/local/sbin, /usr/sbin and /sbin. > > Out of the box, in Debian 10 and later, "su" with no arguments no > longer changes the PATH variable. Your root shell has the same PATH > as your previous shell, with directories like /usr/games but not > /usr/sbin or /sbin. > > This caused ALL KINDS of problems. People would do things like: > > $ su > # apt update > # apt install somepkg > > And the postinstall script for somepkg would fail because it couldn't > find commands that are in /sbin or /usr/sbin, because those directories > which should have been in PATH, which *had* been in PATH for the last > 20 years, were suddenly not there. > > Some people proposed using "su -" as a workaround. And this is fine for > many situations: > > $ su - > # apt update > # apt install somepkg > > Here, it works fine. The commands spawned by apt to install the package > don't care what directory they're executed from. > > But in other cases, it's not fine: > > $ cd /somewhere/that/is/obnoxiously/long/program-1.2.3 > $ ./configure > $ make > $ su - > # make install > > Whoopsie! That just blew up catastrophically, because su - changes > your working directory. You're no longer in the > /somewhere/that/is/obnoxiously/long/program-1.2.3 directory, so you're > no longer in the right place for "make install" to work from. > > > I only use "su" when doing something in MATE terminal on my local > machine. I > > do not use any command line options to "su". I just wait for it to ask > for > > my root password. I perform a few commands and then close that MATE > > terminal. > > > > Does this "brokenness" of "su" have any potential effect on my usage? > > Maybe. If you haven't created an /etc/default/su file, then something > like this: > > $ su > # adduser richard > > may fail. You could work around it in various ways (e.g. explicitly > typing out /usr/sbin/adduser richard). > > My recommendation is to create a one-line configuration file: > > hobbit:~$ cat /etc/default/su > ALWAYS_SET_PATH yes > > That's all it takes. With this file, with this setting, "su" with no > arguments will behave the way it's supposed to: it changes PATH without > changing your working directory. > >
