Re: New course for Debian University
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 10:21:30AM -0600, David A. Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> I understand your comment about fakeroot. However, I didn't include any
> documentation on it for a couple of reasons.
>
> First, I've instructed the reader to read the kernel-package documentation
> which includes instructions on how to do that already. As I state in the
> University principles, I don't want to duplicate existing documentation if
> possible.
But elas, the info I've got on fakeroot is at least confusing:( At one place
you're told to use "fakeroot command..." and somewhere else you'll find
something like "command -use-fakeroot-option..." advertised as sometimes
configure and friends don't work with fakeroot. And elas again I didn't
manage to get the latter variant to work. In other words I just hoped to
get better info at the university, like you did with modules. The info
on modules *can* be found elsewere, but take a lot of digging.
> Second, I really think that the use of fakeroot, in this case, is being
> unnecessarily cautious. I agree that one should not login as root (normally),
> but I see no harm in using su or sudo in an xterm window for the purpose of
> building a new kernel - especially in light of the fact that my intended
> audience is home users with dialup systems. They have a lot less security
> risk (and need for security measures) than the average business box.
>
> I am open to discussion, however. If you can give me compelling reasons that
> a home user should use fakeroot whilst building a kernel, please do.
That might be, but on the other hand *especially* the audience you address
is likely to be no expert, and hence should really be urged in all circum-
stances to refrain from becomming root. Just a matter of consistent
upbringing, not so much a security maesure in this case.
> On the other topic, the kernel-package does state that
> /usr/src/kernel-source-etc is an acceptable location for the kernel source.
> If anyone can give a compelling reason not to make the linux symlink, I will
> listen.
In an other thread no-one came forth with such compelling reasons, so
I think I remembered incorrectly and that link is alright after all.
--
groetjes, carel
Reply to: