On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:38:44AM +0100, Jesper Anderson wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 12:13:48PM -0800, Tim Hockin wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 12:49:24AM +0100, Jesper Anderson wrote: > > > GTK has been like that for years now. Check the archives of SLASH'EM, > > > a Nethack clone, for lots of back and forth. In short, they're not > > > going to change. > > > > Do they have a valid reason? Or are they just imposing their paranoia on us > > for fun? > > Their explanation is here: > > http://www.gtk.org/setuid.html > > They've met a lot of resistance and not backed down yet; I seriously > doubt they will. Therefore, coding around it in a consistent way will > be necessary. I'll dig in my archives and see what I can find ... > although I'm not sure an of it is useful.
i talked to tim janik on #lad yesterday and he said, that we should mail gtk-devel-list and CC: owen taylor with a description of the problem, and with a statement that we have read setuid.html. what we need is, that the test must be for [ug]id == 0 and not generally uid != e_uid. so we have a chance of getting this into gtk. joq: You are a native speaker, can you write the mail ? -- torben Hohn http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language