Why Mint? Was [Leaplist] backup application

[Jim Hartley]

OK, there is what I consider the critical difference--the critical 
drawback--to the "sudo" paradigm. It uses your regular password for 
everything. I feel that requiring a DIFFERENT PASSWORD to do system 
commands (as opposed to user commands) serves as a reminder and warning 
that you are going somewhere dangerous. Not just for keeping a newbie 
away from stuff he shouldn't be doing; using that other password reminds 
**ME** to be more careful.

I don't want to "sudo this" and "sudo that" because it's a pain; doing 
system stuff I usually open a Terminal window and do a bunch of 
commands. But "sudo su" or "sudo -s" loses the warning I get from having 
to type a different password.

Maybe it helps people moving over to Linux because it looks more like 
Windoze where your first logon becomes the administrator, but I 
personally will NEVER consider looking like Windoze to be any kind of a 
recommendation :-)

Jim Hartley

Jesse Goerz wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 11:23 -0400, Kevin Korb wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I like to annoy ubuntu types by starting out my instructions with 'sudo
>> su'  which is pretty much the same as su except it uses your password
>> instead of the root password.  Then I don't have to tell them to sudo
>> every little thing.
> 
> Although it's not as clever, 'sudo -s' does the same thing.  Some
> reading...
> 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2009/05/msg00177.html
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RootSudo
> 
> Jesse
> 
> 

-- 
Teen Angel - a ghost story - http://teenangel.netfirms.com

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.