Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 12:44:52 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygdev Subject: [RFD]: Egor's proposal for a Cygwin server process Message-ID: <20010531124452.G1870@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygdev Mail-Followup-To: cygdev Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Hi, I would like to revive the discussion about a sort of server process providing critical services to Cygwin processes. The reason is that I found another good example how such a server could be used: s-uid and s-gid applications and files. Now that I know how to switch user context and while trying to port Paul Vixie's cron/crontab to Cygwin I found that it's annoying not to have that feature of other operating systems (no names!). To set s-uid/s-gid bits in the NTFS filesystem is trivial (ntsec ON!) but a non-privileged user can't start a privileged process as with the s bits. Only a server process running under LocalSystem account (or another account with appropriate privileges) could serve non-privileged user processes with that feature. So, as far as I can see, we have already three reasons to invent that server process: - Secure handles - IPC - s-uid, s-gid facility I think we will find more later on. So, how is the current "mood" related to such a server process and how keen are people to work on that? Has somebody a suggestion how to interact with that server process? Sockets? Named pipes? Smoke signals? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.