www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
X-Info: | This message was accepted for relay by |
smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net as the sender used SMTP authentication | |
X-Trace: | UmFuZG9tSVa7UD3Aukq6PfLx/HVWLaeCMCXCkpg5TRzQdAt7FhQ6JpJgzHf2jfLQ |
Message-ID: | <3EFF1958.20308@cygwin.com> |
Date: | Sun, 29 Jun 2003 12:52:40 -0400 |
From: | Larry Hall <cygwin-lh AT cygwin DOT com> |
Reply-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529 |
X-Accept-Language: | en-us, en |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | Harald Houppermans <houppermans AT home DOT nl> |
CC: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: free pascal cross compiler from windows to linux working. |
References: | <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0306282256180 DOT 22307-100000 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu> <002901c33dec$7462bcf0$395d79d9 AT cp250405a> |
In-Reply-To: | <002901c33dec$7462bcf0$395d79d9@cp250405a> |
Harald Houppermans wrote: >>>So other weird red hat linux server behaviour... I have to use: ./hello >>>( just hello does work on knoppix ) >>> >>>That's probably a red hat linux server setting... ./ means current > > folder... > >>>Just wondering what that is all about. >> >>"." is not in the PATH by default on most Unixes, as that introduces a >>security hole. > > > Why is putting the current path in the path variable a security hole ? That's really a question for another list. Still, just think about all the exploit possibilities that exist if you have a path with a constantly changing state and without a defined set of permissions. I don't think it's a stretch to state that this is a less secure environment than the reverse. >>IMHO, it's unlikely that Linux can destroy NTFS partitions that it only >>has read-only access to. I've been wrong before, though... > > > Well it sounds to scary for me :D Don't be scared. The read-only NTFS driver for Linux has been stable for years. With the exception of disk partitioning tools, which are expected to manipulate partitions and therefore very likely will destroy existing data, there's nothing in Linux that's going to damage your NTFS partition. The read-write version of the NTFS driver is another story however. Still, this all seems pretty off-topic for this list as well. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |