On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 09:36:14AM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Roger Leigh <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:59:51PM +0000, Clint Adams wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:04:20PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > >> > What do others think of moving bash to important (required and important > >> > are part of the base system)? > >> > >> I think that this is a great idea. > > > > Likewise. > > > > 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. > > > > [Slightly related: it would be nice if d-i could default to > > password-free locked root account for wheezy, i.e. sudo by default, > > which would partly mitigate the issue by not requiring the use of a > > root shell for most uses of the root account.] > > I really really disagree... > > In case of disaster running under root is essential. Of course. This change would in no way prevent running under root in case of problems. If the root account is locked and has no password, you get dropped into a root shell on the console like normal, but the password prompt is skipped, if fatal errors are encountered at startup. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Description: Digital signature