Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 03:25 +0100, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > I confess I'm baffled as to why upstream did this change, why it was > needed and if it actually was needed. > I can't seem to find anything about it in the online changelog > either. > Seems something completely arbitrary. Or an oversight. Or a mistake. I'm baffled by the fact that people make a huge issue about a comment for a possible configuration in /etc/sudoers. The change doesn't introduce anything, it just adds an example of something you could possibly implement. This is actually the same reason why I'm annoyed by bugreports that request a different order of comments or examples in the kernel26 PKGBUILD for configuration. IMHO we should just remove that completely and not care about such things, I mean... I don't add "#add --enable-xcb to enable XCB" in the cairo PKGBUILD either.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
> I find it interesting that upstream made a change/addition just to > accommodate for one distribution. Usually it's the distro that patches > things for their own benefit. > > Sorry. That was me.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
> On 9/7/2010 1:22 AM, David C. Rankin wrote: >> Guys, >> >> Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group >> designation along with the traditional %wheel: >> >> ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command >> # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL >> >> >> Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? >> > > The change happened here: > > http://www.sudo.ws/repos/sudo/diff/387719e52d0f/plugins/sudoers/sudoers > > Relevant part of the log: "and a %sudo line for debian." > > It seems "we" don't want or use a sudo group. > I find it interesting that upstream made a change/addition just to accommodate for one distribution. Usually it's the distro that patches things for their own benefit.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 9/7/2010 1:22 AM, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group designation along with the traditional %wheel: ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? The change happened here: http://www.sudo.ws/repos/sudo/diff/387719e52d0f/plugins/sudoers/sudoers Relevant part of the log: "and a %sudo line for debian." It seems "we" don't want or use a sudo group.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 9/7/2010 9:25 PM, Mario Figueiredo wrote: As far as users (administrators) are concerned, the wheel group can be named anything and nobody will care. Those who still want to use the name "wheel" just need to change the sudoers file. And that's why this change was so unnecessary. An historic and innocuous reference is lost to one arbitrary decision. And with it the need to rewrite manuals, tutorials, and any other reference mater It wasn't a change, it was an addition. wheel still works.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
i tried to add myself into the sudo group to avoid possible future problems and found out that sudo group does not even exist. i will just ignore this and keep granting sudoer privilege by user.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 07-09-2010 20:19, David C. Rankin wrote: Thanks guys, I guess I'll transition to sudo from wheel or just implement the sudo group in addition to wheel so I can use it in the future changing a decade+ of mental inertia that says wheel. It is funny how we really are creatures of habit :p I confess I'm baffled as to why upstream did this change, why it was needed and if it actually was needed. I can't seem to find anything about it in the online changelog either. Seems something completely arbitrary. Or an oversight. Or a mistake. As far as users (administrators) are concerned, the wheel group can be named anything and nobody will care. Those who still want to use the name "wheel" just need to change the sudoers file. And that's why this change was so unnecessary. An historic and innocuous reference is lost to one arbitrary decision. And with it the need to rewrite manuals, tutorials, and any other reference mater
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 09/07/2010 03:13 AM, Allan McRae wrote: On 07/09/10 16:22, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group designation along with the traditional %wheel: ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? Upstream made the change so it is just being passed along. No idea why but "sudo" does seem a better name for a group of sudoers than "wheel"... Allan Are we going to get sudo in the filesystem package?
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 09/07/2010 05:10 AM, Magnus Therning wrote: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 08:13, Allan McRae wrote: On 07/09/10 16:22, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group designation along with the traditional %wheel: ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? Upstream made the change so it is just being passed along. No idea why but "sudo" does seem a better name for a group of sudoers than "wheel"... Even though wheel is historic[1] I agree that sudo is a better name for the group. /M [1]: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wheel_%28Unix_term%29 Thanks guys, I guess I'll transition to sudo from wheel or just implement the sudo group in addition to wheel so I can use it in the future changing a decade+ of mental inertia that says wheel. It is funny how we really are creatures of habit :p -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Mauro Santos wrote: > On 09/07/2010 11:52 AM, Ty John wrote: > >> Huh. I always wondered what 'wheel' meant. > > I always though that it had to do with being at the wheel, as in command > or in control of things. > > -- > Mauro Santos > Exactly, even I thought the same. Actually, if you've ever used FreeBSD, some root permissions are given to the wheel group. -- Regards, Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nilesh.gr Twitter: http://twitter.com/nileshgr Website: http://www.itech7.com VPS Hosting: http://www.itech7.com/a/vps
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 09/07/2010 11:52 AM, Ty John wrote: > Huh. I always wondered what 'wheel' meant. I always though that it had to do with being at the wheel, as in command or in control of things. -- Mauro Santos
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 11:10:18 +0100 Magnus Therning wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 08:13, Allan McRae wrote: > > On 07/09/10 16:22, David C. Rankin wrote: > >> > >> Guys, > >> > >> Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo > >> group designation along with the traditional %wheel: > >> > >> ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command > >> # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL > >> > >> > >> Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? > >> > > > > Upstream made the change so it is just being passed along. No idea > > why but "sudo" does seem a better name for a group of sudoers than > > "wheel"... > > Even though wheel is historic[1] I agree that sudo is a better name > for the group. > > /M > > [1]: > https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wheel_%28Unix_term%29 > Huh. I always wondered what 'wheel' meant.
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 08:13, Allan McRae wrote: > On 07/09/10 16:22, David C. Rankin wrote: >> >> Guys, >> >> Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group >> designation along with the traditional %wheel: >> >> ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command >> # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL >> >> >> Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? >> > > Upstream made the change so it is just being passed along. No idea why but > "sudo" does seem a better name for a group of sudoers than "wheel"... Even though wheel is historic[1] I agree that sudo is a better name for the group. /M [1]: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wheel_%28Unix_term%29 -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe
Re: [arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
On 07/09/10 16:22, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group designation along with the traditional %wheel: ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? Upstream made the change so it is just being passed along. No idea why but "sudo" does seem a better name for a group of sudoers than "wheel"... Allan
[arch-general] sudoers file change - not much on dev list - reason for changes?
Guys, Got the sudo update with the new sudoers file, Noticed new %sudo group designation along with the traditional %wheel: ## Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to execute any command # %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL Any reason that we would want a sudo group instead of using wheel? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com
