| 1 |
What about installing dyn-bash into something like |
| 2 |
/usr/lib/sandbox/bin/bash, and then pre-pending this to $PATH before |
| 3 |
beginning and restoring the original $PATH afterwards? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Zach |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Joshua Pollak wrote: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> On Tuesday 11 December 2001 4:05, you wrote: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>>Because then any script that refers to /bin/bash during the installation |
| 12 |
>>process uses the static bash, while the purpose is this the dynamic bash |
| 13 |
>>is used. Of course all the scripts could be patched, but then the use of |
| 14 |
>>the sandbox gets quite a bit devaluated. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Fair enough. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>>Joshua Pollak wrote: |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>>>Hi, |
| 23 |
>>> |
| 24 |
>>>Just wondering, but I had a suggestion for the dynamic bash ebuild: Rather |
| 25 |
>>>than replacing the static bash and moving the static bash to /bin/sbash |
| 26 |
>>>(shouldn't that be /sbin/sbash?) anyway, why not just install the new |
| 27 |
>>>shell to /bin/dyn-bash or dbash or something, and make the sandbox |
| 28 |
>>>scripts call everything via that shell? |
| 29 |
>>> |
| 30 |
>>>I'm not sure if that's technically possible or not, but it seemed like it |
| 31 |
>>>would make a lot of things simpler, and reduce the risk of sysadmins |
| 32 |
>>>messing something up. |
| 33 |
>>>_______________________________________________ |
| 34 |
>>>gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 35 |
>>>gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 36 |
>>>http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 37 |
>>> |
| 38 |
>>_______________________________________________ |
| 39 |
>>gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 40 |
>>gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 41 |
>>http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 42 |
>> |
| 43 |
> _______________________________________________ |
| 44 |
> gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 45 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 46 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> |
Archives