Groups and Elm 1.5b

Article View: comp.mail.elm

Article #3718

#3718

From: Dave Taylor
Date: Tue, 05 May 1987 00:59

19 lines
1360 bytes

From: mkhaw@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA (Michael Khaw)
Subject: Re: Elm Comments...
Date: 4 May 87 22:58:56 GMT
Organization: Teknowledge, Inc., Palo Alto CA

In the last full release of elm, electing to make elm a setgid program
apparently just #define'd a symbol that was only tested for by leavembox.c
to decide if it should chown() with getgid() or getegid().  As of the
recently posted set of 8 patches, leavembox no longer contains the #if
test in question.

So, does it really matter if the patched elm runs setgid or not?

Mike Khaw
-- 
internet:  mkhaw@teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
usenet:	   {hplabs|sun|ucbvax|decwrl|sri-unix}!mkhaw%teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
USnail:	   Teknowledge Inc, 1850 Embarcadero Rd, POB 10119, Palo Alto, CA 94303

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1724@hplabsc.HP.COM>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!styx!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!hplabs!hplabsc!daemon

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!styx!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!hplabs!hplabsc!daemon
From: taylor@hpldat.UUCP (Dave Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Groups and Elm 1.5b
Message-ID: <1724@hplabsc.HP.COM>
Date: Mon, 4-May-87 20:59:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.1724
Posted: Mon May  4 20:59:23 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 6-May-87 00:43:15 EDT
Sender: daemon@hplabsc.HP.COM
Reply-To: taylor@hpldat (Dave Taylor)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Interface Technologies Group
Lines: 19
Approved: taylor@hplabs (with 'postmail')