Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 10:09:00 -0400 From: Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca> To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Add generic username for 3rd-party MTA's Message-ID: <19990903100900.A17903@mad> In-Reply-To: <vqcwvu8xvnr.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami on Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 01:10:32AM -0700 References: <19990901204859.B14974@mad> <21096.936259315@axl.noc.iafrica.com> <19990902100845.A1098@mad> <vqcwvu8xvnr.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 01:10:32AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > >> differences are 1) entries in inetd.conf are sample entries only, 2) >> ports have no way of adding those entries to inetd.conf themselves >> (since touching /etc is illegal). > > Uh, you're contradicting yourself. Touching /etc is not illegal. Well, ok, the word "illegal" was a little strong. However, this is a long-standing policy from at least 1995/6. See the following relevant message-IDs: 199509201159.EAA04965@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU You state that touching /etc is "hardly sacred" but that it is wise to avoid it due to the large contingent of people who feel strongly against it. The contingent of people appears to have included markm and ollivier, but not Terry Lambert who advocated "templating" so that ports could modify /etc but still have a read-only root fs. I could not find the previous discussion you refer to -- it was probably only in -hackers and not -ports). GDcVv0nyd6@ache.dialup.ru A reference to the ultimate goal of switching /etc to be read-only is made by ache. [It does not appear he agreed with the "large contingent" mentioned above, though]. 199601221813.TAA04300@keltia.freenix.fr A reference to the policy of not allowing ports to touch /etc is made by ollivier. I believe this is the message that I read and remembered. I suppose I could have chosen a wimpier word than "illegal", but we have tried to avoid schmucking with /etc for quite a while... I believe this is a good thing to avoid. > Besides those that add uid/gids, most shell ports add entries to > /etc/shells. Yes, I know that. :-) -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990903100900.A17903>