Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:18:00 -0600 From: Joe Halpin <joe.halpin@attbi.com> Cc: "standards@FreeBSD.ORG" <standards@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: at utility changes Message-ID: <3C307398.5A83DEE4@attbi.com> References: <3C200BBA.9D26ED93@attbi.com> <20011228031537.B99161@espresso.q9media.com> <3C2DF35D.1F54BBC3@attbi.com> <20011229153328.D99161@espresso.q9media.com> <20011230102138.GJ69365@daemon.ninth-circle.org> <20011230130404.A78954@colnta.acns.ab.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've got a question for the standards gurus here. The POSIX draft says the following: "XSI Users shall be permitted to use at if their name appears in the file /usr/lib/cron/at.allow. If that file does not exist, the file /usr/lib/cron/at.deny shall be checked to determine whether the user shall be denied access to at..." Currently, at(1) looks for these files in /var/at. It's been suggested that I symbolicly link them to /var/cron from there. Anyone have an opinion about whether that would comply with the standard or not? Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C307398.5A83DEE4>