From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Oct 27 2: 3:55 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EB015374 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:03:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com) by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.040 #1) id 11gOzU-0008lo-00; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:03:32 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Michael Lucas Cc: jcwells@u.washington.edu, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: su -m vs. su toor? (Was Re: user toor?) In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 26 Oct 1999 11:19:59 -0400." <199910261519.LAA93657@blackhelicopters.org> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:03:32 +0200 Message-ID: <33715.941015012@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 11:19:59 -0400, Michael Lucas wrote: > Is there some reason why you wouldn't use "su -m" instead of "su > toor"? Is there some security issue of which I'm unaware? It's not about security, so don't let people scare you on that score. It's about what you want to happen, specifically how you want your environment to look after the promotion to super-user. You really do need to read the su(8) manpage to understand this. There are concepts in there that will only make complete sense after reading the sh(1) manpage, but that's probably not entirely necessary for your purposes. Later, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message