OK, now that changes my view of the things. Having processes without UID is unavoidable that way, and quite naturally, you would ask about the permissions for them.
Still, it does not really make the forth set necessary, since you could have the full functionality with the standard system (Just have the "all" set valid independant of any group memberships and move everything you want to protect into specific groups) On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 11:43:09AM +0100, Niels M�ller wrote: > There's actually an idea behind this that might be "revolutionary", at > least compared to Unix. On Unix, each process has a current uid > (except for some privileged processes, that can have a saved and an > effective uid and generally switch back and forth to any uid it > likes). > > On Hurd, a process can have any non-negative number of uid:s. A single > uid might be the common case, but su can add other uids to a process > while it's running. And processes with no uid:s at all (the login > shell being just one example) is also possible. -- -- ______________________________________________________ -- JESUS CHRIST IS LORD! -- To Him, even that machine here has to obey... -- -- _________________________________Norbert "Nobbi" Nemec -- Hindenburgstr. 44 ... D-91054 Erlangen ... Germany -- eMail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tel: +49-(0)-9131-204180
