Re: policy violation and bug reports. - some resolution?
On 25 Feb 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Christian" == Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de> writes:
>
> Christian> On 25 Feb 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: [snip]
> >> I would propose that no package keep files in user home directories
> >> as a policy. This is not hard to do, and it would allow the user
> >> full control over their home directory, which is a right we should
> >> respect.
I can only agree to this.
> Christian> Right. I'm wondering why we need to ship the /root/.bash*
> Christian> configuration files at all! It looks like all what they do
> Christian> can also be done in /etc/profile, right?
>
> Well, maybe not. root's path should have sbins in ti, normal
> users should not get it by default. Also, roots bashrc could be a
> little more paranoid.
Yes, indeed.
> I still think that /usr/doc/base-files/examples/root.bashrc.gz
> is a nice place.
That sounds like a great idea.
Another idea for the postinst (UNTESTED):
if [ ! -e /root/.root.bashrc ]
then
gunzip -c /usr/doc/base-files/examples/root.bashrc.gz > /root/.bashrc
fi
To protect users that don't want to have a /root/.bashrc at all, something
like this could be included:
# If /root/.bashrc does not exist, it will be created when the base-files
# package is upgraded. If you want to prevent this (i.e. you don't want
# to have any commands in /root/.bashrc), create an empty /root/.bashrc
If this is still a Bad Thing, I have another idea:
if [ ! -e /root/.root.bashrc ]
then
cat <<EOF > /root/.bashrc
# This is the default .bashrc file for user root.
# This file contains only comments because many developers are against
# providing default commands in this file.
# For an example of what could be done in this file, look at
# /usr/doc/base-files/examples/root.bashrc.gz
EOF
fi
The same could be applied to all /root/.bash* files, of course.
Remco
Reply to: