This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: About the 'su' command
- From: Elfyn McBratney <elfyn at cygwin dot com>
- To: Brian Dessent <brian at dessent dot net>
- Cc: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:36:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: About the 'su' command
- References: <OFF3690BDE.37E01F9D-ON85256D56.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 Brian.Kelly@empireblue.com wrote:
> >> Am I missing something?
> In my not-so-humble opinion, "script portibility" means copy script to box,
> "maybe" chmod it to make it executable - and GO!! I'm guessing that "su"
> will be part of the future default capability of cygwin.
So do we, but it takes more than download, chmod and go. You have to take into
consideration those poor user's without a security model.
The Cygwin daemon will hopefully take care of all of this user-context
switching, as long as the OS (NT/20003/XP/2003) supports it and is set-up
The only problem I
> have with the Resource Kit su is that - well - "it's in the Resource Kit".
> Which means I have to hunt it down and install it -
> or even worse "purchase it" UHHGGGG!!! MS has a nasty habit of "dropping
> support" for their junk and "cleaning" thier website of things like "old"
> resource kits - or at the very least, moving it around and making it a
> ROYAL PAIN to find.
> I hate going to MS for anything - it just plain SUCKS. Plus I have no idea
> how well MS su even works with cygwin. Have you used the two together??
I consider this to be blasfamous. ;-)
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html