On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 21:00:59 +0300
Mihamina Rakotomandimby <mihamina@rktmb.org> wrote:

> Use sudo.

Weak! Real fascists use sudosh!

Rui

ps: I'm sure there are some fascists who are more fascist so feel free
to point out even better options
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Am 08.08.2012 23:03, schrieb m.roth@5-cent.us:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM, <m.roth@5-cent.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> <flame, but not to you, Heng Su>
>>> VCS's that let multiple people check the same object out at the same
>>> time.... You're *exactly* back where you were before people were using
>>> VCSs.
>>> </flame>
>>
>> Errr, what? No sensible VCS forces you to wait for someone else to
>> finish their portion of the work.
>
> You're wrong. I've worked in small and large teams, and *ALWAYS* we
> checked out with locks. If two people need to work on one file, then
> either they need to work together on one copy, and check it back in
> together, or the file needs to be split into more than one, so that one
> person can work on each. This is the way it was at a medium sized
> environmental company I worked at (that was working on ISO 9000), and it
> was the way it was at a Baby Bell I worked at, and it was the way it was
> when I worked on the City of Chicago 911 system.
>
> I have vehemently been against the fad of the last half a dozen or so
> years, with multiple people checking out and working on the same file.
> I've seen hours or days of a developer's work wiped out, when a team lead
> hacked some quick fixes, then merged the file back in.

It seems you are vehemently against the development model the Linux
kernel is thriving on. Or perhaps you just never had a chance to look at
git.

T.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On 08/08/2012 11:34 AM, Brian Mathis wrote:
> Capturing history files is error-prone and a very bad way to approach
> this problem. You should instead look into using process accounting,
> provided by the psacct package. You can read about it here:
> http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/howto-log-user-activity-using-process-accounting.html

+1

bash_history is not a log for the admin, it's a convenience for the
user. Users who want to hide their tracks can unset HISTFILE or switch
to a different shell. Process accounting is the only solution that's
even remotely reliable.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos