Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:24:13 -0400 (EDT) From: David Raistrick <keen@damoe.wireless-isp.net> To: Matt Rudderham <matt@researcher.com> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Loren Koss <loren@pciway.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: I deleted my shell by mistake!! Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010032016070.21594-100000@damoe.wireless-isp.net> In-Reply-To: <NDBBLEKOOLGIBFPGLFEKKEGECEAA.matt@researcher.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Matt Rudderham wrote: > >don't don't change root's shell! > Why should the root shell not be changed? I am also kind of new I guess. I The theory that I have always heard about changing the root shell is not to change it to something that is not based in / . The reasoning behind this is that if you lose your /usr (or whatever) slice, you still have access to your root account. Of course, I've never had a problem with this (mind you, I never managed to delete the shell I was using whilst in multiuser mode...)since when you boot single user, it /asks/ you what shell to use, and doesnt give a rats ass what is in the master.passwd file..... This is the only theory I've heard as to not changing your shell to a shell not based off of /...(mind you, if you go deleting /bin/sh or something, you're pretty much hosed all around..though i guess that does leave you /bin/csh to use in single user to get things working after a damn good bit of work...) Anyway, I'd love to hear a sound reason why to never change your root shell at all.. (I've never heard of that before, either...) And any more theories about not changing it to something off of /, if you have them.;) ....david (100% tcsh since '89) -- David Raistrick Digital Wireless Communications davidr@dwcinet.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0010032016070.21594-100000>