On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 16:05:37 -0600
golinux@??? wrote:

> On 2018-11-22 14:55, Alessandro Selli wrote:
> > On 22/11/18 at 16:25, Didier Kryn wrote:
> >> Le 22/11/2018 à 13:25, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
> >>> chown -R a-w /bin
> >>> chown -R a-w /sbin
> >>> chown -R a-w /lib
> >>
> >>     Sorry, I meant chmod.
> >>
> >>     Mounting read-only isn't more secure than marking a directory
> >> read-only. root can change it anytime in a single command.
> >
> >
> >    Do you think root cannot change anytime file's permissions on the
> > filesystem?
> >
> >   Of course it adds security to the system, because if the
> > filesystem was mounted ro root HAS to remount it rw in order to be
> > able to do changes on the filesystem.  Should you only change
> > file's permissions you have NOT protected anything, because I
> > inform you, on any Unix, since the dawn of Unix time, ROOT CAN DO
> > WHAT IT WANTS REGARDLESS OF FILE PERMISSIONS!
> >
> >   Didn't you know this?  Whom am I debating with, a Windows
> > sysadmin, a full time Valve gamer, a systemd developer?
> >
> >   You are again blockheadedly ignoring the fact that read-only is
> > *NOT* the only setting that make sense changing on the /usr
> > filesystem! There
> > are several, and I already *twice* listed a few of them: nobarrier,
> > noatime, iversion, nodev, etc etc.
> >
> >
> >   Do you know so little of filesystem management or are you
> > trolling?
>
> It seems you missed this good advice from Roger Leigh:
>
> "Let me begin by stating that I found your reply (and others) to be
> rude, unnecessarily aggressive, and lacking in well-reasoned
> objective argument. It's poor communication like this which caused
> me to unsubscribe from the Debian lists, and also to this list a good
> while back (I only read the digest summary on occasion, and rarely
> participate). I find it fosters an unfriendly, unpleasant and
> unproductive environment which I don't enjoy working in. When you're
> doing this type of work as a part-time volunteer, it's extremely
> demotivating and disheartening to be treated this way. It would be
> unacceptable in a professional setting, and it's equally unacceptable
> here. Please do think about what you have written before sending it;
> it costs nothing to be nice, even when you are in disagreement with
> someone."

Good advice, but sometimes it can be counter productive.

There are always "two" sides/views to any situation and I've always
found any out burst can be helpful, cathartic and generally lead to
increased production.

If someone is posting in a manner that causes offence to someone, it is
better that it be drawn to the attention of the poster. They can then
choose to modify their posting style or not. At least both sides know
where they stand.

I'd much rather have contributions(posts) than sulking. YMMV, but I
dislike tofu, blancmange and similar.