On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 12:16:49AM +0100, Rhialto wrote: > On Thu 15 Nov 2012 at 20:18:56 -0600, David Young wrote: > > Also, enforcing access along "effective roots" lines may be inflexible > > or unwieldy, maybe a more abstract notion of "process coalition" is > > better. Let each new root have a corresponding new coalition, but > > perhaps we should be able to create a new coalition without changing > > root, and change root without changing coalition. > > That would make yet another process grouping, confusingly (dis)similar > to process groups, controlling-terminal groups, sessions, (and am I > forgetting more perhaps?)
Process groups, controlling-terminal groups, and sessions are not already confusingly dissimilar from each other? Perhaps coalitions could subsume them all: process group, controlling-terminal groups, and sessions could become coalitions of different privileges & properties. Dave -- David Young [email protected] Urbana, IL (217) 721-9981
