Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2013
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Tony Cook via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: >> I think the �Uid_t_size > IVSIZE� case is crazy and can be safely >> removed. I can't imagine any platform having bigger uid_t than >> pointers. > > That isn't a new check - it was added in 1999 by jhi - see > 887d29384f0bc4b6197573ce19ff42abfe67fa51. > > Brian's patch simply reproduces it. I realize that, but I still suspect it's wrong. That patch introduces it for «st_size, st_uid, st_gid», though it makes a lot of sense for st_size, I don't see how it does for [ug]id. This seems like accidental cruft to me. >> Also, I find sv_setuid/sv_setgid rather confusing names, given the >> setuid/setgid syscalls. I'd prefer to see it being called something >> else (sv_setid may be a good one, I can't imagine the signedness of >> uids not matching gids). > > POSIX provides two types, Configure probes for both types. > > I consider it unlikely for them to be different, but both POSIX and > Configure treats them different, so treating them as the same time feels > fragile to me. Fair enough. LeonThread Previous