Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:01:11 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.demon.nl> To: Mark Ovens <marko@freebsd.org> Cc: Kent Stewart <kstewart@urx.com>, Simon J Mudd <sjmudd@pobox.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make buildworld failing Message-ID: <20001008160111.A97340@freebie.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <20001008144909.D253@parish>; from marko@freebsd.org on Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 02:49:09PM %2B0100 References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010081103370.9771-100000@phoenix.ea4els.ampr.org> <39E03D71.AC278983@urx.com> <20001008132312.A253@parish> <20001008154111.D96958@freebie.demon.nl> <20001008144909.D253@parish>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 02:49:09PM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote: > On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 03:41:11PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 01:23:12PM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 02:25:05AM -0700, Kent Stewart wrote: ... > > > should be quicker as chflags(1) won't have to test every file (99% of which > > > won't have the schg flag set). > > > > To be honest I'm puzzled as to the usefulness of noschg in the first place. > > People already having root privs are not stopped by it. > > Oh yes they are: I'm familiar with the behaviour below. But I classify it as annoying, if root is too dim to be careful then... Wilko > /tmp # touch foobar > /tmp # chflags schg foobar > /tmp # ls -lo foobar > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel schg 0 8 Oct 14:46 foobar > /tmp # rm foobar > override rw-r--r-- root/wheel schg for foobar? y > rm: foobar: Operation not permitted > /tmp # rm -f foobar > rm: foobar: Operation not permitted > /tmp # whoami > root > /tmp # -- Wilko Bulte wilko@freebsd.org Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001008160111.A97340>