From owner-cvs-sbin  Sun Mar  2 11:51:37 1997
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-sbin>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA28112
          for cvs-sbin-outgoing; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:51:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA28011;
          Sun, 2 Mar 1997 11:50:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rover.village.org [127.0.0.1] 
	by rover.village.org with esmtp (Exim 0.56 #1)
	id E0w1HH0-0005fW-00; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 12:50:18 -0700
To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/ping ping.c ping.8 
Cc: CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org,
        cvs-sbin@freefall.freebsd.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 02 Mar 1997 11:36:07 PST."
		<97Mar2.113620pst.177476@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> 
References: <97Mar2.113620pst.177476@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>  
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 12:50:18 -0700
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Message-Id: <E0w1HH0-0005fW-00@rover.village.org>
Sender: owner-cvs-sbin@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <97Mar2.113620pst.177476@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> Bill
Fenner writes: 
: Is it a good idea to call getuid() for each packet?  Wouldn't it make
: more sense to cache its value, since it's not going to change?  (Perhaps
: at the same time as we setuid(getuid())?)

I don't think that it matters enough to be worth the extra effort at
optimizing.  getuid() is a cheap system call, and we only call
getuid() when verbose is true.  And then we should be doing that only
once a second.  However, in less time than it has taken me to whine
about this, I've added it to my local copy and it compiles....

Warner