[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Non-compliant access behavior?

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: Non-compliant access behavior?
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:01:10 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

J de Boyne Pollard, le Thu 24 Dec 2009 09:51:01 -0800, a écrit :
> ST> The problem I encountered is that I couldn't run gcc over
> ST> files in a directory which belonged to a group my I was in.
> ST> I hope you'll too find it quite surprising.  
> Only inasmuch as gcc is even using access(), whose use is only really
> appropriate in the context of set-UID or set-GID executables,

Then please tell that to gcc people, not me.  That's the whole point of
my question mark: yes, POSIX doesn't tell about it so GNU/Hurd is
completely compliant in that regard.  But compliancy is also about the
common behavior, and here gcc assumes some behavior of access().

> ST> Be it POSIX-compliancy or not, I believe following
> ST> what gcc thinks is compliant would be useful.
> Then you're wrong.  It wouldn't be useful. access() isn't useful.
> It's a bad idea whose use should be avoided.

Then please tell that to gcc people, not me.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]