From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 25 18:10:46 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA01558 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:10:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01553 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:10:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA28746 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:01:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from UNKNOWN(), claiming to be "current1.whistle.com" via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd028744; Tue Nov 25 18:01:27 1997 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 17:59:16 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: issetugid(2) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk This has broken all sorts of things here. I thought that the syscall interface for 2.2.x was being kept unchanged. This call makes it impossible to run binaries (e.g. vi) compiled under 2.2.5+ on a 2.2.2 machine. Surely the library routine that calls this should cope with it not being in the kernel, in the same way that Peter did his new syscalls. was this considered teh 'correct thing to do?' was there discussion? I must have dismissed it and now it's bitten me :( I have many machiens on people's desks here running everything from 2.1.0 to 2.2.5, but teh chroot environments they use are all 2.2.2. I was upgrading the chroot environment to 2.2.5(+) but it can only be used on the newest machines, and I don't want to have to upgrade all those machines..! Peter, how did you trap your new syscalls? (i can't even remember which they were) I'll see if I can work up a similar workaround if I can find a reference. julian (GRRR)