On Sunday 01 March 2009 07:47:44 Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Daniel Lannstrom wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:11:56AM -0500, Glen Barber wrote:
> >> This explains one of the reasons not to change root's shell:
> >>
> >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/securi
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 09:55:39AM -0800, new_guy wrote:
>
>
> RW-15 wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:16:50 +
> > Frank Shute wrote:
> >
> >> pdksh is statically linked and I don't know if bash is.
> >
> > It's a build option.
> >
> >
>
> Seems root should have a static shell alw
RW-15 wrote:
>
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:16:50 +
> Frank Shute wrote:
>
>> pdksh is statically linked and I don't know if bash is.
>
> It's a build option.
>
>
Seems root should have a static shell always... otherwise, all bets are off
as some of the shared libs may be inaccessible or d
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 11:21:54 -0800, prad wrote:
> besides, you don't really need to, do you?
> i just log in with su -m and get to use my own account's aliases etc,
> but as root.
Furthermore, since the introduction of the sudo command (which
is installabe by ports / package) prefixing commands wi
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 17:43:55 +0100, Daniel Lannstrom wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:11:56AM -0500, Glen Barber wrote:
> > This explains one of the reasons not to change root's shell:
> >
> > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/security.html#TOOR-ACCOUNT
>
> Yes that's exactly what I mean
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 13:51:32 -0500
Jerry McAllister wrote:
> I am not necessarily recommending all this, but it is better tham
> changing the actual root account's shell.
>
besides, you don't really need to, do you?
i just log in with su -m and get to use my own account's aliases etc,
but as root.
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 03:50:29PM +0100, Sniper wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I heard that changing root shell to bash is not good idea, also programing
> in any C shell not applicable. So which shell is the most appropriate for
> root user ?
You can get your tail in a crack if you boot to single user or an
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 04:16:50PM +, Frank Shute wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 03:50:29PM +0100, Sniper wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I heard that changing root shell to bash is not good idea, also programing
> > in any C shell not applicable. So which shell is the most appropriate for
> > ro
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:16:50 +
Frank Shute wrote:
> pdksh is statically linked and I don't know if bash is.
It's a build option.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscr
Why is this not a good idea? The only reason I can think of it that you
want your root shell on the root hard drive. As many system use a
separate partition for /usr and that bash installs to /usr/local/bin per
yes it may be a reason, but there is always /rescue directory.
and - at least me - p
I heard that changing root shell to bash is not good idea
from whom?
use what you like the most.
, also programing
in any C shell not applicable. So which shell is the most appropriate for
root user ?
anything you like.
___
freebsd-questions@freeb
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Daniel Lannstrom wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:11:56AM -0500, Glen Barber wrote:
>> This explains one of the reasons not to change root's shell:
>>
>> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/security.html#TOOR-ACCOUNT
>
> Yes that's exactly what I meant. Is t
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:11:56AM -0500, Glen Barber wrote:
> This explains one of the reasons not to change root's shell:
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/security.html#TOOR-ACCOUNT
Yes that's exactly what I meant. Is there any other reason except for
that? As I see it that problem c
Frank Shute wrote:
I think programming with csh is deprecated nowadays - a shell guru
could tell you if that's true.
Sure csh is deprecated for programming, and has been for a long time[*].
But this is not about shell programming. It's about what interactive shell
root should have. That's a v
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 03:50:29PM +0100, Sniper wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I heard that changing root shell to bash is not good idea, also programing
> in any C shell not applicable. So which shell is the most appropriate for
> root user ?
>
I changed my root shell to pdksh with no ill-effects. I just
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Daniel Lannstrom wrote:
> Why is this not a good idea? The only reason I can think of it that you
> want your root shell on the root hard drive. As many system use a
> separate partition for /usr and that bash installs to /usr/local/bin per
> default I can see how
Why is this not a good idea? The only reason I can think of it that you
want your root shell on the root hard drive. As many system use a
separate partition for /usr and that bash installs to /usr/local/bin per
default I can see how that can cause troubles. But are there any other
reasons? Unstabil
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Sniper wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I heard that changing root shell to bash is not good idea, also programing
> in any C shell not applicable. So which shell is the most appropriate for
> root user ?
>
/bin/csh
--
Glen Barber
___
> > I have been using bash for root shell some time now without noticing
>> any problems. My bash is statically linked and I have moved it to
>> /bin.
>>
>> What kind of problems should I expect?
>
> in this case probably none. the warning (sh|c)ould be generalized to
> "never change r
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-10 16:06:26 +0300:
> > Also, never change the shell for root. It needs to be as it is for
> > some things to work right.
>
> I have been using bash for root shell some time now without noticing
> any problems. My bash is statically linked and I have moved it to
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
