[NTLUG:Discuss] SuSE 9 or 9.1 PATH environment changes after su -- understanding why, instead of bashing

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 01:16, Ralph Green, Jr wrote:
> This is completely untrue.  Stick with the facts, please.

You should re-read your correspondence.  You went all over the place,
using labels like "broken" and "half-hearted attempt" in addition to
"annoying."  If you don't like something, that's cool.  Everyone finds
something different o be "annoying," and I'll respect that.  But the
other comments, just flat out based on ignorance.

Sorry, I return arrogant statements with the same arrogant attitude.  I
kept if off-list.  You decided to take one small detail and make a big
stink on-list.  As I stated was "legacy," and others also followed-up
with their similar reasonings, there is a reason why older Linux
distributions act a certain way.  Not to be "annoying," but because it
is just "how it has been done before."

But even with the changes, it seems your comments on Red Hat are limited
to earlier releases.  Newer Red Hat releases change the PATH for su. 
Furthermore, there seems to be little consistency between distros. 
Which means no difference than before, I use absolute paths if I want to
be sure for security.

Attempt to understand things.  Just don't label them "broken" because
they don't act the way you think they should.  This "versus" stuff needs
to go.  Use what you like.  But don't feel you need to bash what you
don't -- especially not from a standpoint of not understanding why.
 

-- 
Bryan J. Smith                                  b.j.smith at ieee.org 
------------------------------------------------------------------ 
"Communities don't have rights. Only individuals in the community
 have rights. ... That idea of community rights is firmly rooted
 in the 'Communist Manifesto.'" -- Michael Badnarik