Subject: Re: "su" in r escue?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/24/2004 09:11:48
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 00:29, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> > when my machine is in trouble, i usually do not have a window where
> > i log on as root, so i can do very limited troubleshooting (for
> > instance, i cannot change shlib symlink to older one as "itojun").
> > so - how about adding "su" in rescue binary? there may be file
> > size issue (due to addition of password check routine). or, if
> > we make "su" runnable by people in wheel group, we can skip password
> > check? (leaving a room with logged-in terminal has always risk so
> > it just increases risk factor)
> What is wrong with using option -s booting into single user mode or booting
> using a "rescue"-disk or cdrom in order to undertake the required changes? I
> don't believe that adding complexity and consequently bloat to the rescue
> binaries is the way to go when alternative procedures are available.
when you cannot do power-cycle + singleuser login, nor power-cycle +
rescue-cd-boot, what would you do? i have been in such situation
many times. most cases it is shlib issue.