IBM said that for security, the LIBPATH is removed if you su to another
user.

BUT the parent/child/more_child processes are running within my own
environment. LIBPATH is always blank in all child processes. I may
have to re-export LIBPATH in all scripts as a workaround.


"Hajo Ehlers" <service@metamodul.com> wrote in message
news:1129574638.200344.90240@o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
> Bernard Dhooghe wrote:
>> Tested on 5300-01 and 5300-03.
>>
>> Confirm the described behavior on both versions.
>>
>> Solution?
>
> I do not know if it helps but i have found on aix 5.1 that if i change
> from a lower security and a different shell to root i will lose PATH
> and LIBPATH environment. PATH is set to absolut minimum plus extensions
> in root's profile.
> LIBPATH is wiped out.
>
> Example: ( ksh -> bash -> ksh )
> login as root (ksh)
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> /usr/lib
>
> $su - bashuser
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> /usr/lib
>
>
> $su - root
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> [EMPTY]
>
> The same for a ksh-user ( ksh -> ksh -> ksh )
>
> login as root (ksh)
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> /usr/lib
>
> $su - kskuser
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> /usr/lib
>
> $su - root
> $ echo $LIBPATH
> /usr/lib
>
>
> So you might check ' which process does have which right' for each
> process in you command chain.
>
> You should read also:
> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infoce...6b%73%68%22%20
>
> Technical Reference: Base Operating System and Extensions, Volume 1
> exec: execl, execle, execlp, execv, execve, execvp, or exect Subroutine
> ...
> The LIBPATH variable, when set, is used in favor of LD_LIBRARY_PATH;
> otherwise, LD_LIBRARY_PATH is used. These library path variables are
> ignored when the program that the exec subroutine is run on has more
> privilege than the calling program (for example, an suid program).
> ...
>
> hth
> Hajo
>