[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Jailkit-users] help , Keith

From: Olivier Sessink
Subject: Re: [Jailkit-users] help , Keith
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:10:52 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060812)

Stephen Tallowitz wrote:
> Hello again,
>> 2 is a bit of a funny alternative, jk_lsh is designed as
>> alternative for bash if you want to disallow interactive shells. So
>> if you want an interactive shell just do 1 and don't use jk_lsh.
> this may be true for bash, but I remember (from the back of my foggy
> memory somewhere), that I once experimented with freenx and there was
> a difference if I executed some freenx program directly, or ran it
> from "within" jk_lsh. This was the difference between being able to
> execute some programs in KDE and not being able to do so. So jk_lsh
> had an effect on programs being executed from within jk_lsh.

the system() call uses /bin/sh to execute a program. This doesn't work
if /bin/sh (or /bin/bash) doesn't exist. I know for Nomachine (the
commercial version of freenx) that it needs bash because of that.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]