Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Joshua Murphy <poisonbl@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Am I wrong?..
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 06:30:25
Message-Id: c30988c30910012330i47e56d47rff32ba471f874417@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Am I wrong?.. by "Arthur D."
1 2009/10/2 Arthur D. <spinal.by@××××.ru>:
2 >>> You appear to be demonstrating that you don't fully understand the
3 >>> problem:
4 >>>
5 >>> 828 ~ $ grep nano /usr/portage/app-admin/sudo/sudo-1.7.2_p1.ebuild
6 >>>        # XXX: /bin/vi may not be available, make nano visudo's default.
7 >>>                --with-editor=/bin/nano \
8 >>
9 >> How so? That config option for sudo sets the DEFAULT editor, what to use
10 >> if nothing is defined in the config file or environment variable. That's
11 >> what both my text and the portion of the ebuild that you have quoted
12 >> state. It in no way forces the use of nano in order to use visudo. If
13 >> that were the case, DEPENDS would specify nano instead of accepting
14 >> virtual/editor.
15 >
16 > Agree. There's no need in making vim as depends. But in other hand in
17 > vanilla sudo
18 > package there's VI hardcoded by default. And MOST if not ALL users who have
19 > VIM
20 > installed on their shiny Gentoo systems expect that VIsudo will behave as it
21 > did
22 > for long tim ago. There are historical (or some other) reasons for making VI
23 > default
24 > editor for this utility. It's like they don't respect not only endusers
25 > favours but
26 > the developers' too, no?
27 >
28 > WHY NOT CHECK if vim binary is in place and ONLY THEN (when it's obviously
29 > absent)
30 > hardcode the Gentoo Best Award of Choice Editor?
31 >
32 > I repeat once more.
33 > Every user who has VIM installed on theirs systems is forced to do extra
34 > configuration, to make sudo work as expected, just because someone prefer
35 > other editor and thinks that vanilla choice is bad. Isn't that just stupid?
36 >
37 > --
38 > Best regards, Spinal
39
40 And everyone who has emacs has to do extra work too, in order to get
41 sudo to respect their chosen editor. Changing the default fallback for
42 visudo when the environment variable isn't defined will add in further
43 dependencies and/or put a dependency on a package that can't be
44 reasonably assumed to be on the system in the near future. You're not
45 being forced to do more work because you use vim, you're doing more
46 work because you remove the sane default editor from the system. As
47 does everyone removing nano and using pico.... and... how many others?
48 Go to LFS, build it all, build emacs, set EDITOR to emacs, and run
49 sudo visudo. Please. I have a rather good guess that you'll be,
50 amazingly, using the default that was set at build time for the sane
51 default editor, in LFS's case vim (whether called by that or the vi
52 symlink to it), that the distro creators chose. Or if you vary from
53 the instructions, choosing some other editor at sudo's build time,
54 you'll be running that. The ebuild does the logical thing in choosing
55 an editor that a) is in place by default and b) is less likely to be
56 on the system or off the system by the admin's whim. Most leave the
57 default in place. I suppose, really, the only more guaranteed editor
58 would be "busybox vi" ... because VERY few go about breaking the
59 default tools built into busybox... but what would that leave the many
60 who use nano by default, as... it IS the distro default, to do?
61 Compared to nano, vi (let alone a bare minimal vi like is in busybox)
62 is a pain to use for a person who's never seen it before.
63
64 Also, randomly, I could be wrong here, not being a sudo user myself
65 outside of my ubuntu laptop... but if you look into sudo ... it drops
66 the environment, aside from those chosen specifically to be preserved
67 by root, through its configuration, as a security measure. It's not an
68 ebuild problem, it's not a 'defaults' problem. From what you seem to
69 see as 'proper' behavior for sudo, it's an upstream security decision
70 problem.
71
72 --
73 Poison [BLX]
74 Joshua M. Murphy
75 Yet another vim user.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Am I wrong?.. Joshua Murphy <poisonbl@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-user] Am I wrong?.. "Arthur D." <spinal.by@××××.ru>