[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Moving bash from essential/required to important?

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 08:32:50PM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On ma, 2011-04-04 at 19:43 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > Regarding the root shell issue, I wouldn't have an issue with it
> > being /bin/sh.  The admin is always free to chsh it to the shell
> > of their choice.

> We could even have d-i set the root shell to bash if it installs bash.
> Or have bash do it always, even, if root's shell is /bin/sh.

This doesn't address the problem that the package manager will no longer be
treating bash as Essential, with the result that root's login shell may be
rendered unusable at some point during an upgrade.  It also removes the
requirement that the bash maintainer ensure the package is usable when
unpacked but not yet configured.  How do we mitigate this?  The latter could
be mitigated by calling out the requirement separately in Policy, but what
about the former?

Users who have made a conscious decision to use a different shell as their
root shell (such as zsh) may have accepted this incremental increase in
risk, but I'm not convinced that we want to do this for all users by default
(if bash is still Priority: required, it will be installed by default, so
all users will be affected unless they opt out).

And if /bin/sh is going to be dash (which I think is what we want), I
wouldn't like to inflict that on anyone as the default root login shell.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: