On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:03:13PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Harald Welte wrote:
>
> > + if ((!info || ((unsigned long)info != 1 &&
> > + (unsigned long)info != 2 && SI_FROMUSER(info)))
> > + && (euid ^ p->suid) && (euid ^ p->uid)
> > + && (uid ^ p->suid) && (uid ^ p->uid)) {
>
> No doubt this was copied from somewhere else. But why do people go to the
> effort of confusing readers by using "^" instead of "!="? These aren't
> bit-oriented values.Well, I'd rather keep the new code as close as possible to the original check_permission() code, to make it obvious that it's basically doing the same thing. I think if you want to clean this up, it could be an additional patch on top of mine (once there is a final version and it gets merged. > Alan Stern -- - Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
pgpXdDcXAf2zQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
