|
|
|
|
|
|
by BlackRing
2558 days ago
|
|
|
rw file access doesn't mean there's a lack of file level permissions restricting a non sudo user from accessing an otherwise restricted file. case in point: try editing the /etc/hosts file without sudo. you can't save (without invoking sudo from within vim). ro means no matter what I try, that file is ro unless the fs is remounted rw. Again, it doesn't negate file system level user/group permissions. and remounting a system level partition rw isn't something I'd do on a whim. I like the idea of a ro partition for system level OS files, personally, but without user level access somehow - it's not something to be looked forward to. |
|
|
Apple is clearly stating that the user will have access, so I'm not concerned on that front.
What bothers me is the "will revert to read-only after a reboot" part, which seems unnecessarily punitive. It's like Apple is saying "We're going to let you do this thing, but we don't like it, so we're going to make you redo it every single time to remind you of our disdain."
Elsewhere in this thread, Pwinnski said he likes having an extra, persistent safety check. I think that's great. But, an extra command line flag to make the setting persistent really shouldn't be too much to ask for.
If my launchd idea works in practice, this is all moot, and I retract all my complaints. I'm just nervous.