Robert Woodcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Without going in depth as to what traceroute and ping are (a fruitless flame
> war)
Facts can not build a flame war. Opinions (about "depth" or somesuch)
can.
> suffice it to say that I disagree with your "deeper" comment.
Ok.
> These 'boundaries'
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 08:24:42PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Dylan Paul Thurston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> > > at the risk of reigniting a flame war, how is traceroute in a different
> > > catagory that ping?
>
> tracerout
Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > traceroute is "deeper" than ping.
>
> and that changes something? one cannot assume that because someone is not
> logged in as root, they are a casual user.
Why not? Non-casual users can start these programs from sbin
nonetheless (see FHS rationale for
> Agreed (mostly). It is very important that Debian have things in the same
> place as other Linux distros, and other common Unix flavours. Otherwise,
> scripts from commercial software and other stuff that isn't always as
> portable as it should be will be spuriously broken on Debian. Lets not
> For instance, a program joeuser uses often is 'traceroute' (which is in
> /usr/sbin).
Right. But the maintainer refuses to do the right thing. End of the thread.
Steve Greenland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 22-Mar-00, 15:59 (CST), Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i think this tread started with someone wanting the sbin directories in the
> > normal user's path by default. i see your point that moving those binaries
> > would break a lot of scr
Miles Bader ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > i think this tread started with someone wanting the sbin directories in the
> > normal user's path by default. i see your point that moving those binaries
> > would break a lot of scripts. i don't think appending t
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 08:48:47 +1100
> From: Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Chad Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: of bash and ...sbin/
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2000
Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i think this tread started with someone wanting the sbin directories in the
> normal user's path by default. i see your point that moving those binaries
> would break a lot of scripts. i don't think appending to the default path
> would break anything. anyo
On 22-Mar-00, 15:59 (CST), Jacob Kuntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i think this tread started with someone wanting the sbin directories in the
> normal user's path by default. i see your point that moving those binaries
> would break a lot of scripts. i don't think appending to the default path
>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 04:59:23PM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> i don't think appending to the default path would break anything.
> anyone have a problem with that?
nope. in fact, i routinely edit /etc/profile on new systems to do
that (i pre-pend the sbin directories, not append them).
it only
Craig Sanders ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> in short, add the sbin directories to your PATH and move on.
>
hey, i no more want to participate in a flamewar than the next guy. :-)
i think this tread started with someone wanting the sbin directories in the
normal user's path by default. i see your
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:50:10AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> Chad Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > I like that debian's bash package has different paths for users
> > and the superuser, but it's caused me to question ideas behind the
> > placement of some programs in 'sbin' directories.
Robert Bihlmeyer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Dylan Paul Thurston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
>
> > > at the risk of reigniting a flame war, how is traceroute in a different
> > > catagory that ping?
>
> traceroute is "deeper" th
Dylan Paul Thurston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> > at the risk of reigniting a flame war, how is traceroute in a different
> > catagory that ping?
traceroute is "deeper" than ping. It exposes things that the casual
user neither sees
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> > As policy states, things that pertain to system administration (and
> > traceroute is for troubleshooting networks) is to be in /sbin or
> > /usr/sbin. The difference between /sbin and /usr/sbin is that things that
> > could be needed
Chad Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> OTOH, i would leave ifconfig in /sbin, as it _is_ about this system, and
> it doesn't provide (much) information that DNS doesn't, unless there's
> sysadminning to be done. (There's also a huge amount of inertia that it
> be in /sbin/ .)
inertia aside,
Gak! I'd like to unask the question (and I do promise to have myself
flogged soon) except for Jacob's sub-topic:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> at the risk of reigniting a flame war, how is traceroute in a different
> catagory that ping?
That, I think, is a good
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > As policy states, things that pertain to system administration (and
> > traceroute is for troubleshooting networks) is to be in /sbin or
> > /usr/sbin. The difference between /sbin and /usr/sbi
Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> As policy states, things that pertain to system administration (and
> traceroute is for troubleshooting networks) is to be in /sbin or
> /usr/sbin. The difference between /sbin and /usr/sbin is that things that
> could be needed to rescue a broken system sho
Chad Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> I like that debian's bash package has different paths for users and the
> superuser, but it's caused me to question ideas behind the placement of
> some programs in 'sbin' directories.
>
> For instance, a program joeuser uses often is 'traceroute' (whi
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 10:43:54AM -0500, Chad Miller wrote:
>
> I like that debian's bash package has different paths for users and the
> superuser, but it's caused me to question ideas behind the placement of
> some programs in 'sbin' directories.
>
> For instance, a program joeuser uses ofte
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 10:43:54AM -0500, Chad Miller wrote:
> Which is wrong? Is it bash' assumption that "only the superuser executes
> stuff in sbin," or that "these programs should be in sbin?" Essentially,
> by question boils down to "To which packages should I apply a bug
> report -- bash
Chad Miller wrote:
> Which is wrong? Is it bash' assumption that "only the superuser executes
> stuff in sbin," or that "these programs should be in sbin?" Essentially,
> by question boils down to "To which packages should I apply a bug
> report -- bash or the others?"
>
This has been discuss
24 matches
Mail list logo
