Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:05:42 +0400
From:      Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
To:        Mike Makonnen <mtm@identd.net>
Cc:        Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
Subject:   Re: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts in ports (without touching localpkg)
Message-ID:  <20040731150542.GA5612@nagual.pp.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20040731145616.GA14576@rogue.acs-et.com>
References:  <20040731104933.GA1312@rogue.acs-et.com> <03C7D82F-E2F5-11D8-9C56-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> <20040731145616.GA14576@rogue.acs-et.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 05:56:16PM +0300, Mike Makonnen wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 03:24:56PM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> > Lets be realistic: Nearly nobody wants his scripts to be sourced in the 
> > startup shell, especially not in /usr/local/etc/rc.d. People who really 
> > want to do this are experts that exactly know what they are doing, and 
> > are not easily confused.
> 
> *sigh* You cannot arbitrarily declare that "nearly nobody wants his
> scripts to be sourced in the startup shell". You have no idea of knowing
> what a user might want to do with his system and what his level of
> expertise is.

That argument is against your position. If you have no idea, user (i.e. 
script) can do _anything_, I mean easily damage startup shell even without 
evil intentions. You know example - apache13. We need minimal protection, 
separating base scripts level and ports scripts level, I mean executing 
them in the subshells. There is rc.local (or a like) to do something with 
startup shell locally, not from inside ports system.

-- 
Andrey Chernov | http://ache.pp.ru/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040731150542.GA5612>