Re: why are shared libs chmod +x? (again)
On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote:
> On Jun 27, David Frey wrote
> > > The only reason I remember is that the shared libraries are
> > > "executed", only not from the commandline, but within other binaries.
> > This might be, but the linker doesn't care.
> > (In Debian 1.1 we had the shared libraries 644, IIRC).
> Stuff that you can't do a fork/exec on shouldn't be +x, IMNSHO. It's just
> confusing otherwise. If someone really cares about shared libraries being
> +x, speak now. Otherwise, I suggest we revert them to 644.
> Is the policy editor reading this?
Yes, I am. (I initiated this thread :-)
I fully agree to Christian. If there are no objections, file permissions
will be reverted to 644.
-- Christian Schwarz
Debian is looking firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
for a logo! Have a
look at our drafts PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .