Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 2 Mar 2009 09:55:39 -0800 (PST)
From:      new_guy <byte8bits@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Root shell
Message-ID:  <22293187.post@talk.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090301183715.5b1571db@gumby.homeunix.com>
References:  <d2f26f270903010650h243df36bx2ea07d434567633e@mail.gmail.com> <20090301161650.GB15344@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> <20090301183715.5b1571db@gumby.homeunix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


RW-15 wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:16:50 +0000
> Frank Shute <frank@shute.org.uk> wrote:
> 
>> pdksh is statically linked and I don't know if bash is. 
> 
> It's a build option.
> 
> 

Seems root should have a static shell always... otherwise, all bets are off
as some of the shared libs may be inaccessible or damaged. So long as bash
is statically linked and properly located, there should not be an issue. But
most folks (linux users) aren't aware of the implications of dynamic linking
and such. So it's probably best to 'just say no' to the OP's question. Leave
root's shell alone unless you know what you're doing and bash is built
appropriately. 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Root-shell-tp22274005p22293187.html
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?22293187.post>