Garrett D'Amore wrote: > James C. McPherson wrote: >> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 19:12:30 -0500 >> Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at Sun.COM> wrote: >> >> >>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:53:48PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>> >>>> I don't understand the point of this. Why is this kind of emulation >>>> helpful? Is this just to create honeypot? Or am I missing something. >>>> >>> No. Remember when ON had to be built as UID 0? It's for that sort of >>> purpose. >>> >> >> ... something that I'm working hard to fully remove. Requiring a >> build as uid 0 has long since past its use-by date. >> > > With smarter archiving tools, we wouldn't need it. (Actually, I > regularly build as not-root, but there are some checks that are not > performed as a result -- namely matching the proto and packaging > ownerships. But of course, if you don't need root, then you don't need > those checks either! :-)
But this is of course very silly; requiring permissions to be match between Makefile and pkgdef is just a waste of time. First normal form, please; keeping the same info in two places (in different forms, no less) is asking for trouble. - Bart -- Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance barts at cyber.eng.sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/barts "You will contribute more with mercurial than with thunderbird."
