Re: systemd-fsck?
Am Sonntag, 11. Mai 2014, 00:55:43 schrieb Kevin Chadwick:
> previously on this list Steve Langasek contributed:
> > > Using systemd breaks something that worked for probably a decade or
> > > longer
> > > before however long that su is in that init script. So on what account
> > > do
> > > you call calling "su" in an init script a bug? It may not be the most
> > > elegant solution to do things, granted, but a bug? Come on. Calling it
> > > a
> > > bug just cause systemd / policykit treat calling su in an initscript as
> > > they do is quite arrogant in my eyes.
> >
> > As the maintainer of the pam package in Debian, I assure you: this is a
> > bug
> > in dirmngr. System services should not (must not) call interfaces that
> > launch pam sessions as part of their init scripts. su is one of those
> > interfaces.
>
> In that case should it be one of those interfaces.
>
> He is right, books tell you (for decades) quite rightly to do just that
> in rc.local for example. Examples are all over the internet, so if this
> breaks your system are you or RedHat going to change all those books
> and websites to say but if you are using Linux post 20?? you now have to
> do it differently unless you use Slackware or maybe Gentoo or???, that
> is irresponsible or bad planning or configuration or perhaps money in
> RedHat's pocket for support if I was inclined to be sinical.
>
> "The su utility allows a user to run a shell with the user and group
> ID of another user without having to log out and in as that other user."
+1
I would start with the manpage of su:
DESCRIPTION
The su command is used to become another user during a login
session. Invoked without a username, su defaults to becoming the
superuser. The optional argument - may be used to provide an
environment similar to what the user would expect had the user
logged in directly.
I think it can´t get much clearer than that. Become another user during a
login session.
Nothing at all about that su spawns another login session. During a login
session even indicates the opposite of it.
So it doesn´t.
According to the documentation at least.
So I do not even see the behaviour in dirmngr init script as a bug anymore. It
is using *documented* functionality.
I´d still replace it with start-stop-daemon as it seems to work fine and seems
to be more standardized to me, yet, the "su" manpage IMHO does not leaves a
doubt here.
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Reply to: