Apparently, though unproven, at 20:40 on Wednesday 10 November 2010, Stroller did opine thusly:
> On 10/11/2010, at 6:04pm, Dan Johansson wrote: > > On Wednesday 10 November 2010 18.17:19 Stroller wrote: > >> On 8/11/2010, at 2:02pm, Dan Johansson wrote: > >>> ... > >>> After updating from dev-lang/perl-5.8.8-r8 to dev-lang/perl-5.12.2-r2 I > >>> am no missing the suidperl binary. Some of my perl scripts _need_ this > >>> "feature". Any suggestion on how to be able to execute perl-scritps > >>> "suid" (except downgrade to 5.8.8). > >> > >> I've been slightly paranoid after a couple of recent updates, so looked > >> to see on my system, and it doesn't have suidperl, either. > >> > >> So I googled it for you: > >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=344945 > > > > Yeah, I have seen that too (after I started this thread). > > What I'm looking for now is some wrapper functionality for my CGI-script. > > Well, if you don't think this decision will be reviewed, have you tried > digging out the previous version of the rebuild (CVS attic, if necessary), > and copying it to /usr/local/portage/dev-lang/perl/perl-5.12.2-r2.ebuild ? > > Stroller. We don't know the specifics of what Dan wants to do, but I would definitely recommend the use of sudo. suidperl always seemed a botch job to me, and effort to get something to work at any cost. Almost exactly the same thought process that led to suid itself (I'm not arguing against suid, I don't know any other easy way to achieve that result - I just resent the need for there to be a suid at all.) I almost never want to "run something as root". I usually want a specific user to be able to run something as root under specific circumstances or times. And all those specifics can be configured into /etc/sudoers, even down to no password being needed. It does mean a litte more work to set sudo up properly, but IMHO it's usually worth the effort. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
