Hello, in the light of a recent spot in Python Paste [1], I've come across the python-daemon [2] implementation and found it also lacks support for supplementary groups.
First, I just wanted to post a patch to the author, but realized the broader context of PEP 3143 that would probably deserve revisiting at the first place. As the target Python version seems not to be decided yet, I see a space for it. If the spirit of solution [2] was to be followed (i.e., initialize this list with all groups of which user derived from `uid` is a member + group derived from `gid` (regardless if `uid`/`gid` is explicit), no change of the PEP would be necessary. This fact of intented handling of supplementary groups under the hood still could be mentioned so the users and authors of compatible interfaces are aware of this "detail". Another way (in the spirit of systemd [3]) is to extend the interface with an option (named, e.g., supplementary_groups) for optional specification of supplemental groups. The default would be something as in the previous paragraph. To be honest, I am not sure how consistently is the concept of supplementary groups used across various *nixes. POSIX seems to admit variances, e.g. (via [4]): ----v---- The System Interfaces volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 does not specify whether the effective group ID of a process is included in its supplementary group list. ----^---- But I believe this should be addressed before the PEP in question is brought into effect. [2] http://groups.google.com/group/paste-users/browse_thread/thread/2aa651ba331c2471 [3] http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.exec.html [4] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/utilities/newgrp.html Regards, Jan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
