Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

on Tue, May 28, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) seperated the wheat from the chaff, and gave us the following chaff...: > On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 12:32:02AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > The point was that the answer to your question ("Is this the first...") > > is readily available from the u

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Thu, 23 May 2002, Petro wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:04:17PM -0400, Rob Ransbottom wrote: > > On Wed, 22 May 2002, Petro wrote: > > > > Even then I ask: You _want_ to keep your users going when your shared > > libs are flakey??? > > I don't have "users" in the normal sense. I run

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 12:32:02AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Wed, May 22, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 03:16:57AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > Is this the first time someone has

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 12:32:02AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Wed, May 22, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > So it has been brought up before, over 2 years ago, and it's still > > wrong? > > The point was that the answer to your question ("Is this the first...") > is read

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

on Wed, May 22, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 03:16:57AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: <...> > > > Is this the first time someone has brought this up? > > Puhleaze: > > There's a bunch of peopl

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 04:32:39PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 02:38:15PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > Yes. Or just figuring out if there is even a wreck, how it > happened > > etc. > > > with the intent of restoring the "wreckage" rather than scrapping > it. > >

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 02:38:15PM -0700, Petro wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:26:16PM -0700, dman wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 05:28:13PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:15:45PM -0700, dman wrote: > > | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:08:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > |

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:26:16PM -0700, dman wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 05:28:13PM -0700, Petro wrote: > | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:15:45PM -0700, dman wrote: > | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:08:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: > | > | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:57:16PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen w

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 05:28:13PM -0700, Petro wrote: | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:15:45PM -0700, dman wrote: | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:08:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: | > | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:57:16PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: | > | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:04:59PM -0700, Petro

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:04:17PM -0400, Rob Ransbottom wrote: > On Wed, 22 May 2002, Petro wrote: > > So it has been brought up before, over 2 years ago, and it's still > > wrong? > > It is not wrong, it just yields little protection. Just from the disk > getting corrupted under an in

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Wed, 22 May 2002, Petro wrote: > > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > All I'm asking for at this point is something that the rest of the > > > Unix World has done forever, a statically linked /sbin/sh for > > roots > > > use. > > So it has been brough

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 03:16:57AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > All I'm asking for at this point is something that the rest of the > > Unix World has done forever, a statically linked /sbin/sh for > roots > > use. > > > >

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:15:45PM -0700, dman wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:08:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: > | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:57:16PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:04:59PM -0700, Petro wrote: > | > > Mostly just some basic copy tools. > | > If

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 03:16:57AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > All I'm asking for at this point is something that the rest of the > > Unix World has done forever, a statically linked /sbin/sh for roots > > use. > > > >

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > All I'm asking for at this point is something that the rest of the > Unix World has done forever, a statically linked /sbin/sh for roots > use. > > Is this the first time someone has brought this up? Puhleaze: http:/

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:08:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:57:16PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: | > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:04:59PM -0700, Petro wrote: | | > > Mostly just some basic copy tools. | > If you need to pick things out of .debs, then you'll need a wor

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:57:16PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:04:59PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:46:47PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > > > You do have a valid point, but a statically linked root shell will > not > > > always work. At lea

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 21 May 2002, Peter Corlett wrote: > It seems that the only merit sash has is that it is statically linked. I > find it to be a horrible shell otherwise, and I'd rather not have that as > the default root shell on my boxes. So if you can't use the

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:04:59PM -0700, Petro wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:46:47PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > > You do have a valid point, but a statically linked root shell will not > > always work. At least you shouldn't rely on it being sufficient... > > You don't rely

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 04:51:08PM -0700, Tom Cook wrote: > On 0, Richard Cobbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Debian is very strongly against making any decision for you we do not > > > have to make. And almost all of our decisions can be overruled. > > True, but I really can't see any harm in

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:46:47PM -0700, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:58:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > This is something that has been bothering me for a while now. > > See, you guys who put these distributions together are pretty > > bright. It takes a lot of

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:42:53PM +, Peter Corlett wrote: > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 17:18:08 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > >> After reading this thread, I decided to install sash. > > I did that too. Is there a reason why it isn't installed by defa

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:32:48PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > Why the sam hell is there not, by default, no questions asked, it's > > installed because it's *right*, a statically linked /sbin/sh as > > roots default shell? > because the days of static bins are long passed.

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:32:48PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > > > Why the sam hell is there not, by default, no questions asked, it's > > installed because it's *right*, a statically linked /sbin/sh as > > roots default shell? > > > > because the days of static bins are l

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:42:53PM +, Peter Corlett wrote: > It seems that the only merit sash has is that it is statically linked. I > find it to be a horrible shell otherwise, and I'd rather not have that as > the default root shell on my boxes. > > I'm not sure you gain much by being able t

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On 0, Richard Cobbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Debian is very strongly against making any decision for you we do not > > have to make. And almost all of our decisions can be overruled. > > True, but I really can't see any harm in making root's shell a > statically-linked binary, myself. Aft

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:58:48PM -0700, Petro wrote: > > This is something that has been bothering me for a while now. > > See, you guys who put these distributions together are pretty > bright. It takes a lot of work, and I see a lot of the discussions > that go in to figuring

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 17:18:08 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: >> After reading this thread, I decided to install sash. > I did that too. Is there a reason why it isn't installed by default? It seems that the only merit sash has is that it is statically li

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 17:18:08 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > After reading this thread, I decided to install sash. I did that too. Is there a reason why it isn't installed by default? -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC,

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, 2002-05-21 at 17:02, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:32:48PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > Debian is very strongly against making any decision for you we do not have > > to > > make. And almost all of our decisions can be overruled. > > But we make the decision

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:32:48PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > Debian is very strongly against making any decision for you we do not have to > make. And almost all of our decisions can be overruled. But we make the decision to include a dynamically linked shell as root's login shell, whic

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

Lo, on Tuesday, May 21, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry did write: Where's the attribution? Who was the OP? > > Why the sam hell is there not, by default, no questions asked, it's > > installed because it's *right*, a statically linked /sbin/sh as > > roots default shell? > because the days of

Re: Serious "Bug" in most major Linux distros.

> > Why the sam hell is there not, by default, no questions asked, it's > installed because it's *right*, a statically linked /sbin/sh as > roots default shell? > because the days of static bins are long passed. if *you* want this, Debian makes it even easier. apt-get install sash