Re: On the phantom nterm service...

2000-04-28 Thread Sergio Brandano
> gnome-session should not be triggered if $sshagent is set. sorry, I intended $startssh. Sergio pgpCK2zYnMnzH.pgp Description: PGP signature

On the phantom nterm service...

2000-04-28 Thread Sergio Brandano
Hi, I am still looking for the meaning of the nterm service, that keeps appearing and disappearing from my list. There does not seem to be any documentation on it. It belongs, I see now, to gnome-session, which is triggered by gdm. Accordig to /etc/gdm/Sessions/Gnome and Default, gnome-ses

Re: Checksums on ftp

2000-04-28 Thread Alexander Hvostov
Jim, No, because those processes would be children of init, not init itself. Regards, Alex. --- PGP/GPG Fingerprint: EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367 AC7A B474 16E0 758D 7ED9 -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GCM d- s:+ a--- C UL P L+++ E W++ N o-- K- w O--- M- V- PS+ PE- Y PGP

Re: Checksums on ftp

2000-04-28 Thread Alexander Hvostov
Jim, Not the capability _bounding_ set. Check the 'lcap' package. The only time the capabilities are restored is when the machine is rebooted, and only a process which originated as a kernel thread (i.e., init, kswapd, etc) can restore capabilities without a reboot. None of those programs will do

Re: Checksums on ftp

2000-04-28 Thread Ethan Benson
On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:03:07AM +, Jim Breton wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 05:35:42PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > > why zap an immutable log file? it won't contain any new entries since > > syslogd cannot write to it either :P you probably mean the append > > only bit. which is inde

Re: Checksums on ftp

2000-04-28 Thread Herbert Xu
Alexander Hvostov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > NFS requires an RPC portmapper, so things get a bit complicated... Just run ppp over ssh. -- Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ ) Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PG

Re: Checksums on ftp

2000-04-28 Thread Ethan Benson
On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 04:30:28PM +, Jim Breton wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 01:13:34AM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > > this contrasts with linux's immutable bit that the superuser may > > remove whenever he wants, making it mostly pointless. (i read > > Yah I looked at it that way too at

Re: dpkg and setuid programs

2000-04-28 Thread Ethan Benson
On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:05:46AM +1000, Joe wrote: > Hello all, > > When installing programs with dpkg (and it's various frontends) you get no > warning when a setuid or setgid file is installed. I would consider it > desirable behaviour of dpkg to alert the user who's installing the package >