Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is Solaris eaccess the same as euidaccess?
Yes. Irix and FreeBSD have eaccess, too. > Should glibc provide eaccess as > an alias for euidaccess? Good idea. > Except on the Hurd, euidaccess actually either just uses access (when r==e) > or uses stat and the usual st_mode rules assuming those are what the > filesystem will actually use, which you can do yourself. rm et al I expect > are never setuid and so can always use the method of calling access, which I admit it is very unlikely that anyone will ever find a use for an rm binary with the set-UID bit set. However, rm might easily be invoked from a set-UID program or script, and using access(2) in that context would be wrong. > is superior in telling truth about permission, but lacks the *at features. > > In keeping with the other interfaces, it should be faccessat and use a new > AT_* flag bit to distinguish real-user from effective-user access checking. > > int faccessat (int fd, const char *file, int type, int flag); > > Does that sound reasonable? That sounds fine. Thanks! _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
