[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a? |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:33:19 +0200 |
Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>> It's starting to look like the cost/benefit ratio is too high,
>> so I don't expect to spend time on this.
>> However, if someone can propose a portable and reliable test
>> for that attribute, I'll be happy to consider it.
>
> How about adding a configure option to set the expected group? The
> default could just be "tty" since it's the right one for the vast
> majority of systems, but allows to override it if necessary.
That would work on systems with a designated TTY group name.
What about those older SYSV-derived systems where stat --format %G $(tty)
prints the primary group of the user running who?
I don't know enough about how write/who/mesg work on
those systems (maybe write is set-*U*ID, not set-GID?),
but patches are always welcome.
- is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Jim Meyering, 2008/07/07
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, James Youngman, 2008/07/07
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Matthew Woehlke, 2008/07/09
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Jim Meyering, 2008/07/11
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Andreas Schwab, 2008/07/11
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?,
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Andreas Schwab, 2008/07/11
Re: is hard-coding the group name, "tty", portable enough for who -a?, Eric Blake, 2008/07/14