From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/2700 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Laurent Bercot" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: s6-log can create current with 640? Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:53:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6f3a28f8-798c-9a55-e79b-2e54b37edf2e@heuristicsystems.com.au> <01b8c564-887f-16cf-405c-8bcfc52c02b1@heuristicsystems.com.au> <62d9001a-73bd-5cfe-4c47-f561c4dfabea@heuristicsystems.com.au> <9f1c10ea-a512-438d-dd3b-4d84119394fe@heuristicsystems.com.au> Reply-To: "Laurent Bercot" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="193804"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: eM_Client/7.2.36908.0 To: Supervision Original-X-From: supervision-return-2289-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Tue Oct 29 09:53:15 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 1iPNFZ-000oHd-I3 for gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 09:53:13 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 30328 invoked by uid 89); 29 Oct 2019 08:53:38 -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 30321 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2019 08:53:38 -0000 In-Reply-To: X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedruddttddguddvjecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfpfgfogfftkfevteeunffgpdfqfgfvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhhrfgggtgfgsehtqhertddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgruhhrvghnthcuuegvrhgtohhtfdcuoehskhgrqdhsuhhpvghrvhhishhiohhnsehskhgrrhhnvghtrdhorhhgqeenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:2700 Archived-At: >Not quite. People find uses for these things, and as the SUS rationale po= ints out, for every potentially useless external equivalent of a (non-speci= al) built-in command someone has come up with an arcane actual use for it. = Even "cd". Oh, definitely. And if my bathtub had a built-in trumpet, I could certainly find a use for it, too; but that doesn't mean it would make sense, no matter whether or not it's written in an official=20 specification for bathtubs. >The POSIX model is therefore that all non-special built-ins are also avail= able as executables; or, rather, that all of the standard utilities that ar= e not special built-ins are simply *available* (via execvp(), find -exec, e= nv, and *all of the other* ways that standard utilities can be invoked), an= d whether they are built-in or not, to a shell or otherwise, is an implemen= tation detail as far as actually invoking the utility is concerned. And I have no qualms about it for builtins that do something else than just change the process state. But for a builtin that's supposed to only change the process state, and whose use as an external program is marginal at the very best, that model is terrible: it tries to make the presence or absence of a shell undetectable (which it can never be), and the consequences of that attempt leak outside of the legitimate domain of the shell, and Dewayne's issue with umask is an illustration of this. -- Laurent