[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: $HOME/bin



> Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 02:08:55PM +0200, Ondřej Vašík wrote:
> >> Stefan Assmann wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I was wondering why there's no $HOME/bin directory and $HOME/bin not
> >>> mentioned in the $PATH variable. Any particular reason not to have that
> >>> by default?
> >>
> >> $HOME/bin is not on every system and the other default directories in
> >> default PATH are(at least on the most of systems ;) ). However, some
> >> Linux distros do add something as:
> >> # set PATH so it includes user's private bin if it exists
> >> if [ -d "$HOME/bin" ] ; then
> >> PATH="$HOME/bin:$PATH"
> >> fi
> >> as default - so this dir gets added automatically when does exist.
> >> I'm generally +1 for changing the default that way - as it would not
> >> change anything for users without that directory.
> >
> > I would only want this at the *end* of the current PATH, not the
> > beginning, for obvious security reasons.
>
> 1. Your practice to a wide extend defeats one prime rationale for ~/bin:
> Replacing/Overriding vendor-provided applications by per-user installed
> versions.
>
> 2. Unless using ~/bin as root, these files are user-installed binaries,
> which under normal circumstances may only have security impacts on user
> files => What you call "obvious security reasons" are minor concerns.

if "su" (instead of "su -") is used, root will inherit user's environment 
including PATH.

> The only real issue you are solving by appending ~/bin instead of
> prepending ~/bin to $PATH is avoiding application-name conflicts.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]