Re: Bug#58640: wrapper does not handle fakeroot well
On Mon, Feb 21, 2000 at 11:09:22PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
> suid nobody will bring back the original reason for the wrapper in the
> first place, the concern was if uid man was compromised it can replace
> the man binaries since it owns them, if it were suid nobody if nobody
> were compromised it could replace the man binary with a trojan.
Can't you just make the man binary read-only then? The wrappers seems like a
very roundabout way to fix the problem.
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.