(Sorry for thread breakage, I'm not actually subscribed but commenting based on the archive.)
On Thu Mar 13 2003, 02:11:50 CST Ove Kaaven wrote: > Yes, they all support what I'm saying: a non-root process cannot > increase its scheduling priority (in the common meaning of "priority", > not the inversed sense that renice and setpriority use, of course, if > that wasn't obvious). Actually, at least Linux has some capability support, and if the Wine process would by some means be set up to receive CAP_SYS_NICE, it could manipulate priorities at will. Unfortunately, I don't think eg. the capability filesystem support is at place currently, so this might take some tweaking. (I'm not sure if eg. a suid root wrapper that would just exec wine with normal user priviledges and give it CAP_SYS_NICE would work.) This solution also is obviously limited to systems supporting CAP_SYS_NICE. Another alternative would be to make a suitably authorized (root or CAP_SYS_NICE) priority switching server, which could respond to spesifically authorized priority switch requests. A bit of a kludge, yes. Of course, any solution that gives user processes access to setpriority() is potentially dangerous, but at least the dangers would be limited, unlike with running Wine as root. -- Mikko Rauhala - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - <URL:http://www.iki.fi/mjr/> Transhumanist - WTA member - <URL:http://www.transhumanism.org/> Singularitarian - SIAI supporter - <URL:http://www.singinst.org/>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
