Ed Greshko wrote:
> Sam Sharpe wrote:
>
>>
>> What about this then?
>>
>> [...@samlap ~]$ echo $PATH
>> /usr/lib64/qt-3.3/bin:/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/opt/real/RealPlayer:/home/sam/.bin:/opt/real/RealPlayer:/home/sam/.bin
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 17:08:56 -0800
suvayu ali wrote:
> That Bugzilla says updates have been pushed to F10. Shouldn't that
> mean its fixed in F11 and F12?
That bugzilla just complained that sudo -V printed info
that conflicted with the behavior of sudo. Apparently the update
they pushed merely mad
Sam Sharpe wrote:
> On 5 February 2010 01:14, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>
>>> On 4 February 2010 16:13, Tom Horsley wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
suvayu ali wrote:
> As far as I understand this, sudo still use
On 5 February 2010 01:14, Ed Greshko wrote:
> suvayu ali wrote:
>> On 4 February 2010 16:13, Tom Horsley wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
>>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>>
>>>
As far as I understand this, sudo still uses your (the regular user's)
$PATH.
>>> Nope, that's mere
On 4 February 2010 17:14, Ed Greshko wrote:
> suvayu ali wrote:
>> On 4 February 2010 16:13, Tom Horsley wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
>>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>>
>>>
As far as I understand this, sudo still uses your (the regular user's)
$PATH.
>>> Nope, that's mere
suvayu ali wrote:
> On 4 February 2010 16:13, Tom Horsley wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
>> suvayu ali wrote:
>>
>>
>>> As far as I understand this, sudo still uses your (the regular user's)
>>> $PATH.
>>>
>> Nope, that's merely what the docs claim. In fact, the secur
On 4 February 2010 16:13, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
> suvayu ali wrote:
>
>> As far as I understand this, sudo still uses your (the regular user's)
>> $PATH.
>
> Nope, that's merely what the docs claim. In fact, the security geeks
> decided sudo absolutely needed to ha
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:00:39 -0800
suvayu ali wrote:
> As far as I understand this, sudo still uses your (the regular user's)
> $PATH.
Nope, that's merely what the docs claim. In fact, the security geeks
decided sudo absolutely needed to have a hard coded PATH and as far
as I know the only way to
On 4 February 2010 15:13, Richard R. Cahilig wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a problem with my fedora 12 box. There is no /sbin and /usr/sbin PATH
> after using sudo. This is the output if I run the command echo $PATH.
> /usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
>
> I tried to add the /sbin an
Hello,
I have a problem with my fedora 12 box. There is no /sbin and /usr/sbin PATH
after using sudo. This is the output if I run the command echo $PATH.
/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
I tried to add the /sbin and /usr/sbin PATH in .bash_profile but I still have
the same pro
10 matches
Mail list logo