Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:09:26 -0800 From: "Michael C. Shultz" <reso3w83@verizon.net> To: Ade Lovett <ade@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Non-root port/package installs Message-ID: <200502081409.26582.reso3w83@verizon.net> In-Reply-To: <4209346F.3010801@FreeBSD.org> References: <200501190505.j0J55Jj2023425@freefall.freebsd.org> <200502081326.09576.reso3w83@verizon.net> <4209346F.3010801@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 01:51 pm, you wrote: > Michael C. Shultz wrote: > > If a port is prefix compliant and the prefix is set to the user's > > home directory then lowered privileges may be waranted, otherwise > > only root should be installing and removing ports IMHO. > > Conceptually, yes. The point of the followup is that it would > probably make more sense to have package building clusters run as a > non-privileged user. > > This would then show up ALL ports that need such modification for > pre-install/pre-su-install and post-install/post-su-install, and > fixes could be done tree-wide, rather than going on a piecemeal basis > which is likely to take considerably longer, and require considerably > more effort. And my point is, if a port is being installed or removed from anywhere other than the users own home it should fail. Seems like to test this idea of yours on the package build cluster would require trying to install and remove a port to the base system to make sure it fails, then to install and remove it from the non-privileged user's home to insure it succeeds. That is a unnecessary waste of time. This sounds like a function of the ports system to deal with, deciding privileges vs ability to install where and when. No need for individual ports to deal with this. -Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200502081409.26582.reso3w83>