Article View: comp.sys.sun
Article #9907Re: ``ncheck -s'' sometimes misses security-relevant files
From: Paul Eggert
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1988 21:14
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1988 21:14
12 lines
1193 bytes
1193 bytes
[Sorry about submitting the ncheck note twice -- I thought my mailer lost it.]
Regarding 'find', compared to 'ncheck -s':
[[ It's just a little slower (even if ncheck worked correctly). --wnl ]]
I also thought 'find' was slower than 'ncheck -s'. But when I measured
them, 'ncheck -s' took 25% more wallclock time than the roughly equivalent
'find', and 60% more user+system CPU time (SunOS 4.0, Sun-3/160, Xylogics
7053, Toshiba MK251, 156 MB partition). In comp.unix.wizards
<2802@pixar.UUCP>, Rick Ace reports that 'ncheck' is unnecessarily buggy
and slow. Until Sun fixes 'ncheck', stick to 'find'.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8812162218.AA00285@win.sm.unisys.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!rice!sun-spots-requestReferences:
<2358@kalliope.rice.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!rice!sun-spots-request From: eggert@sm.unisys.com (Paul Eggert) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun Subject: Re: ``ncheck -s'' sometimes misses security-relevant files Message-ID: <8812162218.AA00285@win.sm.unisys.com> Date: 29 Dec 88 21:14:30 GMT References: <2358@kalliope.rice.edu> Sender: usenet@rice.edu Organization: Sun-Spots Lines: 12 Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu Original-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 88 14:18:07 PST X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 77, message 5 of 14