On 17/07/2020 22.51, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 07:54:09PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 17/07/2020 16.03, dieter wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:59:59 +0200 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 17/07/2020 14.33, dieter wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:20:42 +0200 Carlos E. R. wrote:
For instance, when I want to attach a file to a bugzilla, and the file is owned by root, I first copy that file to /tmp so that my user FF can read it and attach it.
but what should keep root from copying the file directly to your home directory where your user FF can read it and attach it?
That in /tmp it will be seen and deleted at some point. That /tmp is much shorter to write, twice. Does it make sense to keep it after you uploaded it? If not you can just delete it after you uploaded it.
Certainly, but one forgets. The user can not delete it, anyway, it's owned by root.
Or occasionally check your home directory for cruft.
See above :-)
Really?
lion:~ # touch ~mike/foo lion:~ # ls -l ~mike/foo -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Jul 17 22:46 /home/mike/foo
mike@lion:~> ls -l foo -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Jul 17 22:46 foo mike@lion:~> rm -v foo rm: remove write-protected regular empty file 'foo'? y removed 'foo' mike@lion:~> ls -l foo ls: cannot access 'foo': No such file or directory
Ok :-) But if I had saved the file to /home/cer/tmp, the user cron job would not purge it. I have not tried, though.
Ironically, what you said would be true ... in /tmp (or any other directory with "t" bit set in its permissions).
Yes, but a cron job would delete that eventually. Or myself in root mode eventually. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)