Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: Shell Q
From: Anders Jennerberg (ajennerbMSI-UK.COM)
Date: Mon Aug 14 2000 - 09:54:32 CDT
- Next message: Jennifer Myers: "Re: Shell Q"
- Previous message: tristanGLOBIX.NET: "Re: Shell Q"
- Maybe in reply to: C.M. Wong: "Shell Q"
- Next in thread: Jennifer Myers: "Re: Shell Q"
- Maybe reply: Anders Jennerberg: "Re: Shell Q"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
First the difference between the different sh shells:
/sbin/sh is statically linked (does not need any libraries) and it is on the
/bin/sh is dynamically linked (needs libraries) and /bin is a link to
so it is on the /usr partition.
This means that as long as you have /sbin/sh as root shell, you will always
to log in if the root partition works. Gives better chance of repair...
For your problem, make an alias sut='/usr/bin/su root -c /usr/bin/tcsh'. The
you log in as root, just type the shellname (4 letters). If it's not in your
/etc/default/su (uncomment/modify the SUPATH variable).
From: C.M. Wong [mailto:wongcmEP.COM.MY]
Sent: 14 August 2000 04:37
Subject: Shell Q
Forgive my ignorance, but what is the diff between /sbin/sh and /bin/sh as
both are different in sizes? I was thinking of using another sh (tcsh
actually) as a replacement for users and root alike. Security wise, is it
viable if I just replace root's sh at the passwd file? I have read somewhere
that it's not advisable to replace root's shell since if the machine crashes
etc, the replacement shell might not work and there is no where we can get
back in. Probably a better place would be profile, but how do you guys
normally do it? TIA.