on Wed, May 22, 2002, Petro (petro@auctionwatch.com) wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 03:16:57AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Tue, May 21, 2002, Petro (petro@auctionwatch.com) wrote:
<...>
> > > Is this the first time someone has brought this up?
> > Puhleaze:
>
> There's a bunch of people here acting like they've never heard of
> the idea, and the only somewhat reasonable excuse I've heard for not
> doing it is "It's a lot of work", which lead me to believe it hadn't
> been discussed here.
>
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=debian+statically+linked+root+shell
>
> So it has been brought up before, over 2 years ago, and it's still
> wrong?
The point was that the answer to your question ("Is this the first...")
is readily available from the usual place. Your assignment is to read
the earlier posts and either:
- Formulate a previously unaddressed reason root should have a
statically linked shell, rather than pollute the list with largely
irrelevent dialog.
- Understand why the current alternative(s) are sufficient.
- Summarize findings to list and quietly exit the topic.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Moderator, Free Software Law Discussion mailing list:
http://lists.alt.org/mailman/listinfo/fsl-discuss/
Attachment:
pgpBmrZ5Rx5jV.pgp
Description: PGP signature