From owner-freebsd-audit Sun Jul 7 2: 9:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D27937B400 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 02:09:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.139.170]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A0A43E54 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 02:09:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (uucp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6799eCE038833 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 10:09:40 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.org) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) with UUCP id g6799eda038832 for audit@FreeBSD.ORG; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 10:09:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from grimreaper.grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grimreaper.grondar.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g65KNjii076150 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2002 21:23:46 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.org) Message-Id: <200207052023.g65KNjii076150@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: audit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: suidperl References: <20020705102540.A74822@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20020705102540.A74822@dragon.nuxi.com> ; from "David O'Brien" "Fri, 05 Jul 2002 10:25:40 PDT." Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 21:23:44 +0100 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 12:35:04AM +0900, Akinori MUSHA wrote: > > By the way, do we really need a perl wrapper in the first place? I > > suppose we can tweak ports/lang/perl5 to create symlinks (for example) > > when NO_PERL_SYMLINKS is not defined. > > This question really needs to be decided on. Not being a Perl-head I > don't feel qualified to have an opinion. But we do seem to be lacking a > little leadership here. If we are going to have a wrapper, using > `mailwrapper' may be better as it is more exact and does not depend on > one's PATH setting. I am inclining myself to the mailwrapper idea, but generalised out to do more than mail. CURRENT's current perl-wrapper is a good idea, but it is incomplete IMO. M -- o Mark Murray \_ O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message