From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jul 13 6:21:46 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.freebsd.org.uk [194.242.139.170]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C613C37B9F8; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 06:21:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (hak.nat.Awfulhak.org [172.31.0.12]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA35435; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 14:21:30 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA03736; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 14:21:26 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org) Message-Id: <200007131321.OAA03736@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Brian Somers Cc: Ben Smithurst , James Howard , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: /etc/security -> /etc/periodic/security ? In-Reply-To: Message from Brian Somers of "Thu, 13 Jul 2000 10:16:28 BST." <200007130916.KAA00789@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 14:21:26 +0100 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > Brian Somers wrote: > > > > >> Well, "periodic security" will work as long as /etc/periodic/security > > >> exists, so I guess you just mean the docs need updating? I'll get to > > >> that if someone is actually planning on committing this stuff. > > >=20 > > > Perhaps the best option is to do with the inline security option and=20 > > > just run ``periodic security'' from cron ? I can commit the changes. > > > > I don't think there's really a problem with just running security > > from daily. I can add a note that this is normal practice in the > > manpage, and that security shouldn't be run separately unless you set > > daily_security_enable=3DNO or whatever the option is. > > Oops, sorry for the reply latency.... > > I don't think it's appropriate to separate the security script into > multiple scripts unless the intention is to run ``periodic > security''. This is just my personal view though. If you feel > strongly about it, you should bring it up on freebsd-arch. I'll > certainly back down if the concensus says it should be split. Duh! I didn't realise -arch was already on the cc list :-/ > > --=20 > > Ben Smithurst / ben@scientia.demon.co.uk / PGP: 0x99392F7D > > BTW, congrats on your commit bit ! -- Brian Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message