[ On Tuesday, July 23, 2002 at 19:20:07 (+0200), Michael Kukat wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: toor 
>
> And a very different point: Who really changes root's shell?

I _always_ do so.

> Is there anyone
> out there doing so?

Absolutely.  It's either /bin/sh or /bin/ksh on every machine of every
type that I have authority to change it on!

> Did you ever use /bin/ksh as root's shell in Solaris?

Certainly!  (though more properly it's /usr/bin/ksh on Solaris!  :-)

It's only minutely safer to use the static-linked /sbin/sh.  You will
not likely be able to resurrect a Solaris system with a broken ld.so or
libc.so -- you will have to use the CD-ROM (though you can mount the CD
from single-user mode in such a situation -- you don't necessarily have
to boot from it).

> Okay, every shell in /bin in NetBSD is statically linked, so it doesn't matter
> (besides the fast that i hate csh :), but i personally hate changing root's
> shell. Maybe scripts depend on it, and maybe you get problems in different
> places.

No modern OS will have any script that depends on what shell the "root"
(or any, for that matter) account has.  Kernel based interpreter file
support (i.e. "#! /path/to/interp") entirely avoids this problem.  Those
problems went away long ago....

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <g.a.woods@ieee.org>;           <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>