Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
72 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Greg Wooledge
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:11:44AM -0000, Curt wrote:
> There is a bug related to this imbroglio:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721
> (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping,
> because "iputils-ping, as priority 'important', cannot declare a
> dependency on libcap2-bin, which is priority 'optional'").

But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Curt
On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:11:44AM -0000, Curt wrote:
>> There is a bug related to this imbroglio:
>>
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721
>> (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping,
>> because "iputils-ping, as priority 'important', cannot declare a
>> dependency on libcap2-bin, which is priority 'optional'").
>
> But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster.
>
>

Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional?
Or am I once again missing some essential thing?

curty@einstein:~$ apt-cache show libcap2-bin
Package: libcap2-bin
Source: libcap2
Version: 1:2.25-1
Installed-Size: 85
Maintainer: Christian Kastner <[hidden email]>
Architecture: amd64
Replaces: libcap-bin
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libcap2 (>= 1:2.10)
Recommends: libpam-cap
Breaks: libcap-bin
Description-en: POSIX 1003.1e capabilities (utilities)
 Libcap implements the user-space interfaces to the POSIX 1003.1e capabilities
 available in Linux kernels. These capabilities are a partitioning of the all
 powerful root privilege into a set of distinct privileges.
 .
 This package contains additional utilities.
Description-md5: f223f06c6e812dc45d4b21cbd8163d36
Multi-Arch: foreign
Homepage: http://sites.google.com/site/fullycapable/
Tag: admin::configuring, implemented-in::c, interface::commandline,
 role::program, scope::utility
Section: utils
Priority: optional
Filename: pool/main/libc/libcap2/libcap2-bin_2.25-1_amd64.deb
Size: 26490
MD5sum: cf46bb9dd77bd949226b90f735d52f33
SHA256: 8b6a70886d13a53e35bfacebab1bc869a09f405783f734835f313460e80be94e


--
“Decisions are never really made – at best they manage to emerge, from a chaos
of peeves, whims, hallucinations and all around assholery.” – Thomas Pynchon

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Greg Wooledge
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -0000, Curt wrote:
> On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster.
>
> Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional?
> Or am I once again missing some essential thing?

Uh...

arc3:~$ dpkg -s libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
Priority: important
arc3:~$ apt-cache show libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
Priority: optional

OK, I have no freaking idea what this means.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Curt
On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -0000, Curt wrote:
>> On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster.
>>
>> Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional?
>> Or am I once again missing some essential thing?
>
> Uh...
>
> arc3:~$ dpkg -s libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
> Priority: important
> arc3:~$ apt-cache show libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
> Priority: optional
>
> OK, I have no freaking idea what this means.
>
>

curty@einstein:~$ dpkg -s libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
Priority: optional

At least I'm optionally consistent.

;-)

--
“Decisions are never really made – at best they manage to emerge, from a chaos
of peeves, whims, hallucinations and all around assholery.” – Thomas Pynchon

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Reco
In reply to this post by Greg Wooledge
        Hi.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:10:55AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -0000, Curt wrote:
> > On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster.
> >
> > Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional?
> > Or am I once again missing some essential thing?
>
> Uh...
>
> arc3:~$ dpkg -s libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
> Priority: important
> arc3:~$ apt-cache show libcap2-bin | grep -i priority
> Priority: optional

Both show "optional" to me BTW.


> OK, I have no freaking idea what this means.

strace(1) to the rescue.
"dpkg -s" gets package state from /var/lib/dpkg/status.
"apt-cache" also uses /var/lib/apt/lists/*.

Basically your result tells that libcap2-bin is "optional" from the
repository POV, but your local package database thinks it's "important".

And in this case I trust the repository and have to assume that your
local package database is somehow corrupt.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Greg Wooledge
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:19:49PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> "dpkg -s" gets package state from /var/lib/dpkg/status.
> "apt-cache" also uses /var/lib/apt/lists/*.
>
> Basically your result tells that libcap2-bin is "optional" from the
> repository POV, but your local package database thinks it's "important".
>
> And in this case I trust the repository and have to assume that your
> local package database is somehow corrupt.

arc3:~$ grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: important

wooledg:~$ grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: important

wooledg:~$ ssh root@megview5 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
root@megview5's password:
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: important

wooledg:~$ ssh svr4 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
wooledg@svr4's password:
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: important

oledg:~$ ssh meglin2 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
wooledg@meglin2's password:
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional

meglin2 is jessie.  wooledg is buster.  The others are stretch.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Reco
        Hi.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:26:29AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:19:49PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > "dpkg -s" gets package state from /var/lib/dpkg/status.
> > "apt-cache" also uses /var/lib/apt/lists/*.
> >
> > Basically your result tells that libcap2-bin is "optional" from the
> > repository POV, but your local package database thinks it's "important".
> >
> > And in this case I trust the repository and have to assume that your
> > local package database is somehow corrupt.
>
> arc3:~$ grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status
> Package: libcap2-bin
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: important
>
> wooledg:~$ grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status
> Package: libcap2-bin
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: important
>
> wooledg:~$ ssh root@megview5 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
> root@megview5's password:
> Package: libcap2-bin
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: important
>
> wooledg:~$ ssh svr4 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
> wooledg@svr4's password:
> Package: libcap2-bin
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: important
>
> oledg:~$ ssh meglin2 "grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status"
> wooledg@meglin2's password:
> Package: libcap2-bin
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: optional
>
> meglin2 is jessie.  wooledg is buster.  The others are stretch.

Yep. But for me it's (stretch):

$ grep -A2 'Package: libcap2-bin' /var/lib/dpkg/status
Package: libcap2-bin
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Greg Wooledge
I asked on IRC, and got this answer:

  The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's
  mostly a field that has no meaning these days.

I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that.  Are different mirrors giving
out different Packages files with different Priority settings?

Someone who's affected by the missing capabilities on ping might want
to investigate more closely, or add some info to bug #780721.  Adrian
talked about libcap2-bin being changed to "Priotity: important" at some
point in the future (relative to 2016), so maybe that has already happened.
I'm not sure how to *find out* whether that has happened, since we can't
even figure out how to view the actual Priority.  Or, if the Priority
"mostly ... has no meaning", then whatever was stopping Adrian from acting
in 2016 might no longer be a roadblock.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Thomas Schmitt
In reply to this post by Curt
Hi,

Curt wrote:
> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721
> >> (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping,
> >> because "iputils-ping, as priority 'important', cannot declare a
> >> dependency on libcap2-bin, which is priority 'optional'").

> Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional?
> Or am I once again missing some essential thing?

The statement in bug 780721 seems to be outdated. The priority
rules have been changed since then. The package maintainer does not
have the last say on this, anyways.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dreq.en.html#control

  Section and priority are used by front-ends like aptitude when they
  sort packages and select defaults. Once you upload the package to Debian,
  the value of these two fields can be overridden by the archive
  maintainers, in which case you will be notified by email.

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities

  The priority of a package is determined solely by the functionality
  it provides directly to the user. The priority of a package should
  not be increased merely because another higher-priority package depends
  on it; instead, the tools used to construct Debian installations will
  correctly handle package dependencies. In particular, this means that
  C-like libraries will almost never have a priority above optional,
  since they do not provide functionality directly to users. However,
  as an exception, the maintainers of Debian installers may request an
  increase of the priority of a package to resolve installation issues
  and ensure that the correct set of packages is included in a standard
  or minimal install.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

So the explanation in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721#10

  iputils-ping, as priority "important", cannot declare a dependency on
  libcap2-bin, which is priority "optional".

is wrong and in direct contradiction to The Policy.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721#20
quotes exactly the above policy paragraph as

  Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority values
  (excluding build-time dependencies). In order to ensure this, the
  priorities of one or more packages may need to be adjusted.

which i cannot see there any more.
The change probably happened in august 2017:

  https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html#version-4-0-1
  2.5
  [...] Packages may now depend on packages with a lower priority. [...]

Last message in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721
is of february 2016.


So this bug could need an update and iputils-ping could now depend on
libcap2-bin.

As we see in
  https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/i/iputils/control-320180629-2
it is not done yet:

  Package: iputils-ping
  ...
  Recommends: libcap2-bin


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user

Sven Hartge-5
In reply to this post by Greg Wooledge
Greg Wooledge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I asked on IRC, and got this answer:

>   The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's
>   mostly a field that has no meaning these days.

> I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that.  Are different mirrors giving
> out different Packages files with different Priority settings?

No, it means the Priority in the package itself is quite often overriden
by the archive software and thus the Priority in the Packages-file is
different.

But all mirrors will have the same content, of course.

Grüße,
S!

--
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Reco
In reply to this post by Greg Wooledge
        Hi.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:08:22AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> I asked on IRC, and got this answer:
>
>   The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's
>   mostly a field that has no meaning these days.
>
> I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that.  Are different mirrors giving
> out different Packages files with different Priority settings?

Now that you mention it - [1].
A mirror can override a package priority, that's true.
I don't know if http://ftp.debian.org/debian/indices/ is mirrored too,
along with the usual Release files and *debs. It can explain this
discrepancy if it's true.

The question is - which Priority goes into the package database on
package install? That one from the package itself, or the one from the
mirror?


> Someone who's affected by the missing capabilities on ping might want
> to investigate more closely, or add some info to bug #780721.  Adrian
> talked about libcap2-bin being changed to "Priotity: important" at some
> point in the future (relative to 2016), so maybe that has already happened.

It sure did not happen here.


> I'm not sure how to *find out* whether that has happened, since we can't
> even figure out how to view the actual Priority.  Or, if the Priority
> "mostly ... has no meaning", then whatever was stopping Adrian from acting
> in 2016 might no longer be a roadblock.

In the context of the original deboostrap behaviour - it's simple.
debootstrap installs barebones to produce a working apt, and uses it to
install the rest of the packages.

apt trusts the mirror (it would be counterproductive to download and
analyze every package just to extract their Priority and Depends), hence
mirror's priority wins here.

Reco

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/FtpMaster/Override

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Curt
In reply to this post by Thomas Schmitt
On 2019-05-30, Thomas Schmitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So the explanation in
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721#10
>
>   iputils-ping, as priority "important", cannot declare a dependency on
>   libcap2-bin, which is priority "optional".
>
> is wrong and in direct contradiction to The Policy.

I think it would be more accurate to call the explanation *caduc* (or
*caduque*) perhaps.

> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721#20
> quotes exactly the above policy paragraph as
>
>   Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority values
>   (excluding build-time dependencies). In order to ensure this, the
>   priorities of one or more packages may need to be adjusted.
>
> which i cannot see there any more.
> The change probably happened in august 2017:
>
>   https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html#version-4-0-1
>   2.5
>   [...] Packages may now depend on packages with a lower priority. [...]

So it seems the reason invoked above is no longer valid due to a change in policy.

> Last message in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721
> is of february 2016.
>
>
> So this bug could need an update and iputils-ping could now depend on
> libcap2-bin.
>
> As we see in
>   https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/i/iputils/control-320180629-2
> it is not done yet:
>
>   Package: iputils-ping
>   ...
>   Recommends: libcap2-bin
>
>
> Have a nice day :)

Ditto.

> Thomas
>
>


--
“Decisions are never really made – at best they manage to emerge, from a chaos
of peeves, whims, hallucinations and all around assholery.” – Thomas Pynchon

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Thomas Schmitt
Hi,

i pointed to:
> > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html#version-4-
0-1
> > [...] Packages may now depend on packages with a lower priority. [...]

Curt wrote:
> So it seems the reason invoked above is no longer valid due to a change in
> policy.

It can be legally called a bug meanwhile, because
  https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/i/iputils/control-320180629-2
has

  Standards-Version: 4.1.4

whereas the policy change was already in 4.0.1.


If somebody here feels able to test the policy compliant change of
"Depends:", then it would be worth to mail to
   [hidden email]
and to point out that the change is overdue. Binary package iputils-arping
has the same Recommends as iputils-ping. So one should check whether
the reason is the same.

The policy also demands to change libcap2-bin priority to "optional".
Currently it is "important", which probably gets overridden by the repo
deciders.
  https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/libc/libcap2/control-12.25-2
has
  Standards-Version: 4.3.0


So that would be two maintainers to convince ... YMMV.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

andy smith-10
In reply to this post by Reco
Hello,

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:08:38AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> Easy. You run debootstrap, set some --include options (which pull
> libcap2-bin by dependency), and then you tar the whole resulting
> filesystem.
> tar never understood file capabilities, so they are lost in the process.

Sure, tar is one of the example ways I mentioned before of how I've
seen this go wrong.

> debootstrap (no --variant) does install iputils-ping, but does not
> install libcap2-bin. Hence iputils-ping postinst script simply sets
> suid bit on /bin/ping as postinst cannot locate setcap.

Oh, that's interesting. I didn't think of the case where there is no
libcap2-bin. Still, these reporters aren't getting a suid bit
either, so I guess there must be something else going wrong. Not
debootstrap.

Cheers,
Andy

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user

Stefan Monnier
In reply to this post by andy smith-10
> $ getcap /bin/ping
> /bin/ping = cap_net_raw+ep

BTW, if these caps are missing you can recover them with:

    dpkg-reconfigure iputils-ping
   

-- Stefan

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

andreimpopescu
In reply to this post by Gene Heskett-4
On Mi, 29 mai 19, 23:29:21, Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> the default $PATH the installer sets up for $users, apparently does not
> include any of the sbin's, only /usr/bin and /bin. I've been fixing that
> for several generations of debian installs. Probably shouldn't as there  
> may be some good reason for it, but it is MY machine.

It won't be necessary if you switch to merged /usr.
https://wiki.debian.org/MergedUsr

This will be the default for new buster installs. Older installs can be
switched with the package usrmerge.

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

andreimpopescu
In reply to this post by Reco
On Jo, 30 mai 19, 18:43:05, Reco wrote:

> Hi.
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:08:22AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > I asked on IRC, and got this answer:
> >
> >   The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's
> >   mostly a field that has no meaning these days.
> >
> > I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that.  Are different mirrors giving
> > out different Packages files with different Priority settings?
>
> Now that you mention it - [1].
> A mirror can override a package priority, that's true.
This would suggest you can get different results depending on mirror
used, which is not the case. The priority is set in the central archive,
which is then mirrored.

> I don't know if http://ftp.debian.org/debian/indices/ is mirrored too,
> along with the usual Release files and *debs. It can explain this
> discrepancy if it's true.
>
> The question is - which Priority goes into the package database on
> package install? That one from the package itself, or the one from the
> mirror?

APT and debootstrap will definitely use the archive view on priorities
when deciding which packages to download and install.

dpkg on the other hand is probably using the information inside the
package (debian/control) for its database, but probably not much else.
 
This is the most obvious way one could end up with different results.

The other way would be if the archive priority was changed between
different installs.

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Thomas Schmitt
Hi,

Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> The other way would be if the archive priority was changed between
> different installs.

This has happened in april 2016 (maybe related to bug 780721 ?)

  "d/control: Increase Priority of libcap2{,-bin} to important"
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/a3f0fbccfa946b6895da1b3521849d04ccf8da0f

and again four months ago

  "d/control: Drop Priority of libcap2"
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/5386335db24bfff5cc85bda69dbcda6ab2d7d20d

(The latter is not yet in the released package's control file.)

So one maintainer already adapted to the new policy rules.

But
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/iputils/raw/master/debian/control
still has the hunchbacked gesture of recommending an actually necessary
dependency:

  Package: iputils-ping
  ...
  Recommends: libcap2-bin
  ...
  Package: iputils-arping
  ...
  Recommends: libcap2-bin

(I understand that this suffices if your local package management is set
 to automatically install recommendations.
 I also understand that there is a coarse workaround if libcap2 is missing.)

So bug 780721 is still valid and could now be fixed.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Reco
        Hi.

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 09:08:55AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:

> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > The other way would be if the archive priority was changed between
> > different installs.
>
> This has happened in april 2016 (maybe related to bug 780721 ?)
>
>   "d/control: Increase Priority of libcap2{,-bin} to important"
>   https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/a3f0fbccfa946b6895da1b3521849d04ccf8da0f
>
> and again four months ago
>
>   "d/control: Drop Priority of libcap2"
>   https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/5386335db24bfff5cc85bda69dbcda6ab2d7d20d
>
> (The latter is not yet in the released package's control file.)
>
> So one maintainer already adapted to the new policy rules.

Ah, that's what is was. That change made into the stable, I've just checked.


> But
>   https://salsa.debian.org/debian/iputils/raw/master/debian/control
> still has the hunchbacked gesture of recommending an actually necessary
> dependency:

No, maintainer is correct. Not every filesystem supported by Debian
implements extended attributes needed for capabilities. Off the top of
my head it's NFS and JFFS2. Upgrading this particular dependency leads
only to a dependency bloat, and Default Users™ (i.e. ones that are
installing Recommends by default) aren't affected anyway.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Pascal Hambourg-2
In reply to this post by andreimpopescu
Le 31/05/2019 à 08:38, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
> On Mi, 29 mai 19, 23:29:21, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>
>> the default $PATH the installer sets up for $users, apparently does not
>> include any of the sbin's, only /usr/bin and /bin. I've been fixing that
>> for several generations of debian installs.
>
> It won't be necessary if you switch to merged /usr.

AFAIK, the /usr merge does not merge sbin and bin together.

> https://wiki.debian.org/MergedUsr

The wiki says this page does not exist yet.

1234