That's several advantages "sudo" has over "su". However, if you re-
read
my question, you'll probably notice that my question was *not*
about the
difference between "sudo" and "su". Instead I was specifically asking
for the difference Simon sees between "sudo -s" and "sudo su".
JC listed them quite neatly for me. While they both give UID 0 the
differences in the logging, in what happens if you accidentally
type the wrong thing, in enabling the root account, and in paying
attention to 'sudoers' make me prefer never to use 'su'. Thank
you, JC.
No, that is the general advantages of using "sudo" over "su".
That is not the difference between "sudo -s" and "sudo su", which are
functionally equivalent. Neither "sudo -s" nor "sudo su" require the
root account to be enabled/assigned a password, both let you type the
wrong things, neither log beyond the initial event, and both are
allowed by the default sudoers configuratin on OS X.
(See my previous message for more.)
Please note that these *are* good reasons to use sudo versus ANY kind
of root shell, not just one provided by "su". There are other ways to
get root shells, such as "sudo -s". However, the original question is
about the differences between "sudo -s" and "sudo su", because some
people always say "if you need a root shell, use 'sudo -s'; you
should never use 'sudo su'", and that doesn't make any sense. Both do
the same thing (essentially, with the exception of the difference I
noted in my previous message), neither log, and neither require the
root account to be enabled.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Macos-x-server mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/macos-x-server/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
