[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?
From: |
Marcin Cieslak |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken? |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:51:13 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
slrn/0.9.9p1 (FreeBSD) |
>> David Levine <address@hidden> wrote:
> Marcin wrote:
>
>> >> David Levine <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Using setegid() is ok according to POSIX.1-2004, it was previously
>> just a BSD extension.
>
> Thanks. Committed. I also added a check for success of setegid(),
> and adios() on failure.
We also need this:
diff --git a/uip/inc.c b/uip/inc.c
index b457282..7d12842 100644
--- a/uip/inc.c
+++ b/uip/inc.c
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ static gid_t return_gid;
#define TRYDROPGROUPPRIVS() DROPGROUPPRIVS()
#define DROPGROUPPRIVS() \
if (setegid(getgid()) != 0) { \
- adios ("setegid", "unable to set group to %ld", (long) getgid()); \
+ adios ("setegid", "unable to restore group to %ld", (long) getgid()); \
}
#define GETGROUPPRIVS() \
if (setegid(return_gid) != 0) { \
@@ -959,6 +959,7 @@ skip:
static void
inc_done (int status)
{
+ done = exit;
if (packfile && pd != NOTOK)
mbx_close (packfile, pd);
if (locked)
Otherwise "inc" loops endlessly (just replace setegid() with setgid()
again to test).
(I changed the message to "restore" for better debugging).
//Marcin
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, (continued)
Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, Marcin Cieslak, 2015/02/13
Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, David Levine, 2015/02/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, Marcin Cieslak, 2015/02/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, Marcin Cieslak, 2015/02/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, Marcin Cieslak, 2015/02/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, David Levine, 2015/02/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, Marcin Cieslak, 2015/02/13
- Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?, David Levine, 2015/02/13