From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/2668 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jeff Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: chpst -u and supplementary groups Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 01:44:36 +0200 Message-ID: <4779971566949476@vla4-d1c3bcedfacb.qloud-c.yandex.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="77870"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" To: init Original-X-From: supervision-return-2258-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Wed Aug 28 01:44:43 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from alyss.skarnet.org ([95.142.172.232]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i2l8k-000KBQ-VU for gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 01:44:43 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 25606 invoked by uid 89); 27 Aug 2019 23:45:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm Original-Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Original-Received: (qmail 25599 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2019 23:45:05 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.com; s=mail; t=1566949476; bh=vY1XgtTRm7l2bq44rsazPla8ut2iA+cK/l7Wb1LNbC4=; h=Message-Id:Date:Subject:To:From; b=ClRGRn7Pd2vHPoI1CEzQ0VZH3XkvUtlWojHmyY0+pzEnL3UxLlIxJR7QQT/u3PJ5w qfDa5GOC10WCQyptGfC+VUjEd/dNsywJTc5HtcVKekzotDy0m9sVDcIy/5IMK5Om+v Eln8jIv5IrnwbAsSJfWOpwaE3QQ9+w6TXFpS8oHk= Authentication-Results: mxback3q.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.com X-Mailer: Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ] 5.0 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:2668 Archived-At: > Apparently everyone re-implementing daemontools does something like > this. So that brings me back to my original question: > is there consensus that the historical behaviour is a bug? no, this is no bug. > Or are there valid use cases? most of the time one does not want the subprocess to run under additional GIDs, so that is a sane default behaviour. obviously there should be an option that makes "chpst" add all supplementary GIDs the UID belongs to, though (when this is desired by the user). would not be too much work to add such a commandline option to it.