No. I have Acked the change.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:09:46PM +0900, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Andy Zhou <az...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > I am going by the advice of paper " The Murky Issue of Changing >> > Process Identity: Revising “Setuid Demystified” " >> > >> > On page 7, it says: >> > >> > Specifically, all OSes that support getresuid (see Figure 3) also >> > support setresuid and setresgid. These offer the clearest and most >> > consistent semantics, and can be used by privileged and non-privileged >> > processes alike. >> > >> > According to the paper, setuid() may or may not change saved uid, it >> > is OS dependent and may only change effective uid in cause current uid >> > is not >> > zero. >> > >> > Also according to the same paper in Figure 3, getresuid() is supported >> > by Linux, HPUX, FreeBSD and OpenBSD, it would be nice to let those OS >> > use this API. For NetBSD, we can resolve this by emulating the >> > getresuid() call. Make sense? >> >> well, this fallback code is currently for FreeBSD and NetBSD, >> for which the semantics are consistent, right? > > Andy, any further comments on this? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
