Re: dpatch and patching debian/rules
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: dpatch and patching debian/rules
- From: Petri Latvala <adrinael@nuclearzone.org>
- Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 13:09:32 +0300
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050402100931.GM4535@adrinael.net>
- In-reply-to: <3b3745F6gchkkU2@individual.net>
- References: <20050330120851.GA20191@cirrus.madduck.net> <20050330132941.GG8417@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20050330140021.GA29802@cirrus.madduck.net> <20050331070602.GX13154@p12n.org> <20050331075640.GA25140@cirrus.madduck.net> <87d5tgz06g.fsf@peder.flower> <1112258299.7478.47.camel@esme.liw.iki.fi> <3b35s5F6gchkkU1@individual.net> <1112302357.7478.58.camel@esme.liw.iki.fi> <3b3745F6gchkkU2@individual.net>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:07:17PM +0000, Michael Ablassmeier wrote:
> >> what about `/etc/issue' to get this kind of information?
> >
> > Given that the sysadmin can and does edit it as they wish, that is
> > pretty useless.
>
> yes, but this might happen to `/etc/lsb-release' too.
The admin might also modify /etc/passwd. Does this make /etc/passwd a
bad place to specify user accounts?
--
Petri Latvala
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Reply to: