[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: "su is really a broken concept"

You're probably right, Jonathan.  "Su" is so common that it easy to make that error. After looking at the current POSIX list, I did not find it.  Thank you for pointing that out.  

Be well!

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 10:55 PM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com> wrote:
T.J. Duchene:
If someone can do it better, and still keep it compatible with POSIX, more power to them.

This is not the first place where someone has randomly thrown POSIX into the discussion.  "su" is outwith the scope of the POSIX standard.  It's in the SVID, but to my knowledge "su" never made into POSIX.  The SUS mentions it in passing under setuid() as a non-conformant application.

Reply to: