1 |
Hi William, |
2 |
|
3 |
William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> writes: |
4 |
|
5 |
> here is a link to an old, but brief discussion about this. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/2fc1f62c7cf225787fe52f4dace7368c |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I think we have talked about this several other times, but not done |
10 |
> anything about it. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:17:59PM +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> Pardon my ignorance, but does that mean you are essentially relying on |
15 |
>> file system features/permissions and security settings to enforce |
16 |
>> correct use of system tools?! Or is this just to make sudo/etc commands |
17 |
>> 'more convenient' ?! |
18 |
> |
19 |
> The basic problem is that what goes in *bin vs *sbin is quite arbitrary |
20 |
> and the best way to fix it is to make all of the *bin and *sbin |
21 |
> directories accessible to all users. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> You can't rely on a path to separate system-only programs from |
24 |
> programs that users might want to run, and some programs can be run by |
25 |
> users to look around but not change things. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Here is one non-gentoo source discussing this. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Even if we don't adopt the usr merge in Gentoo Linux as default, removing *sbin |
32 |
> from the path doesn't make sense. |
33 |
|
34 |
If there references are useful for users to understand why this decision |
35 |
and potential breakage is made, it might be a good idea to append the |
36 |
links to the news item. |
37 |
|
38 |
Yours, |
39 |
Benda |