Re: [PMH] Idea for Nautilus and GMC.
- From: Miguel de Icaza <miguel ximian com>
- To: Jakub Steiner <jimmac ximian com>
- Cc: nautilus-list eazel com, mc gnome org, prion-me-harder ximian com
- Subject: Re: [PMH] Idea for Nautilus and GMC.
- Date: 23 May 2001 15:17:40 -0400
As has been already mentioned, nautilus has a way how to change perms
without launching a shell (I bet gmc has too, dunno).
Of course I know this. And you do too. And yes, gmc has this as
The problem is not that *we* know that this exists. But the problem
is that I have *seen* people confused while trying to install software
from the network.
Yes, they are not Linux people, they just happened to be using Linux
because someone told them `It is easy', well, as it turns out, it was
I am trying to remove roadblocks here. Try spending some time with a
complete newcomer to Linux and watch them run into problems. For each
problem, try to think of a solution rather than thinking of a
Every "will linux email clients be threatened by melissa-like worms?"
article ends with "we have the execute bit 'security'". I vote for not
having this feature implemented...
You realize that this gives you no security at all right? That if
someone inserts a virus/trojan into a program that you trust you will
go and set the bit manually, and you will run it, and you will not get
a warning, and you will be just as bad, right?
So who are you trying to fool here?
] [Thread Prev