Jacob Albretsen wrote: > I agree with his first suggestion. I would add to it don't give your > normal users sudo privileges so they won't willy nilly press the > upgrade button and then come running to you when everything breaks. > He also seems to have forgotten about Ubuntu 6.06 with his second > suggestion. And IIRC, Ubuntu got a lot of heat of choosing to delay > two months.
Just a rant here, mostly in reaction to slashdot, but your comment triggered it! Normal users? Just how many ubuntu and fedora users even have "admins?" This idea that there are users and admins is fine in an enterprise, or possibly in a household with teenage kids. But 99% of all ubuntu and fedora installs are single-user home systems. The idea of a admin is laughable. I never realized how elitist we can be sometimes until I read the furor on slashdot over non-root package installs on Fedora 12. So really sudo is just a formality. It is a layer of security, preventing malware from infecting the system. But the default F12 policy to allow yum installs of signed packages is a good one. I'd disable it, for example, in the CS dept, and certainly in an enterprise environment. But then again I wouldn't run Fedora on enterprise desktops (or Ubuntu for that matter, except the LTS editions). Furthermore, the policykit setting in F12 to allow non-root installs will only grant them to a user on the console. If you've got console access, you have root, so it's not the security issue that everyone on slashdot tried to make it out to be. So let's recognize that just because something has always been done a certain way in unix doesn't always mean it makes sense in a home user situation. -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info (unsubscribe here): http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
