Re: No benefit for running sash as root shell?
On Sat, 29 Aug 1998, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Joel Klecker wrote:
>
> : At 21:32 -0700 1998-08-28, Shaleh wrote:
> : >Actually I like this feature of BSD systems. Would like it in Debian
> : >too.
> :
> : You're forgetting that /bin and /sbin on *BSD systems are statically-linked.
>
> [ I apologise if this has been thoroughly hashed out before ]
>
> Why doesn't Debian do this? I can see where size could be an issue, but
> I'd think the benefits outweigh those considerations ...
As a related question, I think we should ask 'why doesn't Solaris do
this?'
The Solaris engineers made the decision (I think it was on the release of
2.4/5.4) that /usr was now an essential partition, and they simply
symlinked /bin to /usr/bin. (and similarly /lib and /sbin).
I'm not proposing we follow suit, I'm just wondering what their reasoning
was (perhaps that they provided a rescue CD..?)
Personally, I'd actually quite like to see the *BSD model, unless someone
can explain to me why it's wrong. Another feature of *BSD that I really
like in this area is that when booting into single-user, or shutting down,
after it has asked for your root password, it lets you choose which shell
to run.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: