Adding /sbin and /usr/sbin to everyone's path in F10

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 03:21:40PM -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:30:31AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
>>   
>>> I propose that we add /sbin and /usr/sbin to the path for normal users
>>> (as well as root) for F10? There are plenty of useful tools in there for
>>> non-root users (ifconfig, fdisk, parted), and IMHO, any tool which
>>> assumes the user is root because it lives in /sbin is fundamentally
>>> broken. The LSB doesn't mandate this (at least, not anywhere I can see),
>>> so I propose that we just do it.
>>>
>>> Anyone opposed to such an action?
>>>     
>>
>> As many people already noted there are some reasons to hide them away
>> from "normal" users. Effectively you suggest setting sbindir to
>> bindir, e.g. why have /sbin, /usr/sbin at all if all PATHs point to
>> both sbin/bin so that there is no split?
>>
>> So the argument is not about PATH, but about having the split in the
>> first place.
>>
>> If a command is considered often called by users why not put a symlink
>> to bindir instead?
>>
>> $ ls /sbin| wc -l;ls /usr/sbin| wc -l 312
>> 486
>>
>>   
> Is it really better to keep the rest out of the way though? Consider a user 
> who is told to run a given set of commands, but forgets that he must do it 
> as root. Isn't the average command's "permission denied" message better 
> than "command not found?" The latter is confusing, and can cause panic in a 
> user who (as often happens) has no idea how to use the terminal and is 
> simply following a set of instructions he was told would give him results.

I think the contrary is the case. The user that is told to check his
interfaces with ifconfig and manges to do so and then is told to
change the interface's parameters (like the ip/netmask) is suddenly
confronted with the root/non-root issue in the middle of his unrelated
problem diagnosis.

While if having been blocked right from the start the user's
consiousness about root/non-root is awaken before he starts digging
into the real problem.

(Note: we're talking about the inexperienced users here, everyone in
this thread can add a one liner to his startup scripts to get his PATH
as he likes.)
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080423/96f7f0d9/attachment.sig>