From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ray Olszewski Subject: Re: su fails Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:29:06 -0700 Sender: linux-newbie-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.1.20030715102412.01fa2c40@celine> References: <3F133105.7010309@bcgreen.com> <5.1.0.14.1.20030714080202.01ef9e68@celine> <200307142023.43039.pa3gcu@zeelandnet.nl> <3F133105.7010309@bcgreen.com> <5.1.0.14.1.20030715074706.01faa538@celine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1058288791.4987.20.camel@gandalf.ciccio-net.cjb.net> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org At 01:06 PM 7/15/2003 -0400, Alan Bort wrote: >Well... I think bash actually has a builtin su... so if you reinstall >bash (not a very big package anyway)... it might help. since you've >already installed shadow again... On what basis do you think this to be true? I've never heard of such a capability in bash, and implementing it would (at least on today's systems, ones with passwords in /etc/shadow) introduce some security problems that a standalone su can minimize, if not eliminate. Just to double check, I searched an online version of the bash man page for the string "su". It never appears, except as part of words like "subshell" and "substitute". I hesitate actually to say that you are wrong, Alan, because it is always possible that I missed something. But I do think it worth asking how well-based your belief is. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs