From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 28 06:30:05 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F725106566B; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 06:30:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF73B8FC13; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 06:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (c-67-180-24-15.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.24.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1S6U1YJ098762 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:30:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4F4C746D.3040005@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:30:05 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.2.27) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/3.1.19 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek References: <201202261425.q1QEPm9g069102@svn.freebsd.org> <20120227082811.GC1363@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <20120227082811.GC1363@garage.freebsd.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mikolaj Golub , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r232181 - in head/sys: kern sys X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 06:30:05 -0000 On 2/27/12 12:28 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 02:25:48PM +0000, Mikolaj Golub wrote: >> Author: trociny >> Date: Sun Feb 26 14:25:48 2012 >> New Revision: 232181 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/232181 >> >> Log: >> Add sysctl to retrieve or set umask of another process. > "set umask of another process"? This seems... weird. What's the purpose > of this change? I also wondered on seeing this.. who was it discussed with, and what usage makes this a requirement? Julian