"Craig A. Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 03/20/2007 11:55:27 PM:
> I wish I had something easier or simpler to suggest. The current
> behavior is there by design and has been the way it is for a decade
> or more, so I wouldn't expect it to change.
An ACE along the ACLs for the relevant file
At 10:44 AM -0600 3/20/07, Mark Berryman wrote:
>Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>At 8:36 PM -0600 3/18/07, Mark Berryman wrote:
>>
>>>Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>>
A protected subsystem
identifier can trigger tainting more or less like running with -T on
the command line.
>>>That
Craig A. Berry wrote:
At 8:36 PM -0600 3/18/07, Mark Berryman wrote:
Craig A. Berry wrote:
A protected subsystem
identifier can trigger tainting more or less like running with -T on
the command line.
That was the ticket. The process on the malfunctioning system has a protected
At 8:36 PM -0600 3/18/07, Mark Berryman wrote:
>Craig A. Berry wrote:
>> A protected subsystem
>>identifier can trigger tainting more or less like running with -T on
>>the command line.
>>
>That was the ticket. The process on the malfunctioning system has a protected
>subsystem rights identifier
At 11:43 AM -0600 3/16/07, Mark Berryman wrote:
>Ok, this one has me stumped.
>
>I have two nearly identical systems (both are DS10s running VMS V8.3 but they
>don't have identical disk farms). Both are running the exact same copy of
>HP's Perl 5.8.6 distribution plus the patch they have release
Ok, this one has me stumped.
I have two nearly identical systems (both are DS10s running VMS V8.3 but
they don't have identical disk farms). Both are running the exact same
copy of HP's Perl 5.8.6 distribution plus the patch they have released.
However, on one system, whenever the code reach
