On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 22:14:56 +1100 (EST), Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Takanori> Can you look into PR kern/29844 as well? Takanori> I think after your fix, it should fail even when invoked by super Takanori> user. >> >> The superuser fails as well. bde> setpgrp() is the same as setpgid() in FreeBSD, and the POSIX.1-200x-draft7 bde> documentation for setpgid() doesn't seem to have any special cases for bde> the superuser, so I think the documentation change in the PR is correct. While we are here, it would be even better to clarify the requirements of setpgid(2) like this: The affected process must: o be a descendant of the invoking process, and o belong to the same session as the invoking process does. Takanori's test fails even by the superuser because pid 1 belongs to a different session from curproc's one. bde> POSIX now has setpgrp(), but it is quite different from setpgid() :-(. Not sure if this is what you mean, but setpgrp(2) of Solaris is somewhat like setpgid(0, 0). Spaking of Solaris, the required condition of setpgid(2) in Solaris is a little bit more strict than that in FreeBSD. Solaris prohibits the grandchildren of the curproc to be the target of setpgid(2), while FreeBSD allows that. -- Seigo Tanimura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
