Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 09:54:03 -0700 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: <des@ofug.org> Cc: <js43064n@pace.edu>, <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Kernel Panic Message-ID: <006501c0fcce$45fc5080$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <xzp8zih7sm6.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: des@ofug.org [mailto:des@ofug.org] >Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 9:25 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: js43064n@pace.edu; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG; >freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG; freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Kernel Panic > > >"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> writes: >> That's a case I hadn't thought of - however, "local" search paths should >> generally be at the END of the user's path, not the beginning, >in which case >> the system binary gets called first. > >No! Local paths should be at the beginning, so local binaries >(wrappers etc.) can ovverride system binaries. > I was half-expecting you to say something like that. In response: NO, local wrappers should NEVER be named the same as system binaries because the user then gets used to assuming that the wrapper is in place for all systems Imagine a local wrapper named "rm" that instead of deleting the file puts it in a "garbage pail". You get used to the garbage pail and get sloppy in what you remove - then one day your on another system and do an "rm" without thinking, then realize a mistake, go to the "garbage pail" and find that it doesen't exist. Wahhh!!!! Now, if you are the administrator and you want to wrap a system binary then you do it by renaming the system binary something else, and putting the wrapper in the place the system binary is. But that's not a case of a local binary. >> Both cases are bad practice, and shouldn't be present on a normal system. > >Bollocks. > Bollocks back. If you name your local wrappers your own names then the wrapper works fine if the local path is at the end of the search path. I can see putting the local path at the front for TEMPORARY use - like if you were developing a system binary you wanted to repeatedly test - but you go on a big limb by making a bunch of custom wrappers that duplicate the system binary names. >> I think in that situation you would have to have a swap partition that's >> smaller than the maximum amount of ram that a normal user is permitted to >> allocate - in that case the limits are set too high. > >That, or the limits simply don't account for all the resources a user >can consume, as is the case with mmap(). > OK - but then this is a case where the limiting device is broken. Maybe that should be worked on as well as the swap problem too, no? Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?006501c0fcce$45fc5080$1401a8c0>