Subject: Re: bin/11047: newgrp is missing
To: None <email@example.com>
From: David Laight <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/26/2002 23:00:35
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 03:36:03PM -0600, Rick Kelly wrote:
> The newgrp command happens to be one of the things that I dislike about
But all modern SYSV implementations support groups the same way
netbsd (and solaris) do. The only thing newgrp does is to
change the grouop that files are created with.
OTOH it might be useful to remove the kernel limit on the number
of groups a process can be in.
(Also why is root always explicitly listed in somany groups?
Traditional root privileges mean it doesn't need to be in any
groups - putting root in many groups just makes daemons that call
setuid and setgid but not setgroups leave their children
with additional privileges.)
Shouldn't the setgroups(2) and setuid(2) mann pages cross
refer to each other?
David Laight: email@example.com