Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 05:47:24 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Appropriate path for mount/fsck sub-programs? Message-ID: <28795.1600321644@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <20200916204214.GA87473@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
--------
Brooks Davis writes:
> 0) Do nothing
> 1a) Add /usr/local/sbin to _PATH_SYSPATH (it's only used in mount and
> fsck).
> 1b) The same, but a new variable.
> 2) Switch to _PATH_DEFPATH (that also add .../bin directories).
> 3) Use PATH, optionally prepending /rescue
> 4) Use exevp and teach crunched_main.c to prepend /rescue to PATH.
Why are we even bothering with _PATH_SYSPATH in the first place ?
A) Being able to find the subprograms ?
or
B) Not running random binaries ?
I'd call B a bogus strawman: If we do not trust root's PATH, we
should not trust /bin/sh to find the right fsck(8) in the first
place.
So if the concern only to find the subprograms, we should use ${PATH},
but since fsck is a Very Important Program for bringing systems up,
we should have a user-friendly fall-back.
So my proposal 5):
Use ${PATH}, on failure search through a list of
Well-Known-Directories, and ask the user for confirmation:
fsck -t foofs /dev/da0
fsck error: fsck_foofs not found in $PATH.
Use /rescue/fsck_foofs Y/N ?
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?28795.1600321644>