Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: POSIX vs SVID
Message-ID: <326@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 25 Mar 89 07:22:38 GMT
References: <11916@haddock.ima.isc.com> <1108@auspex.UUCP> <1132@auspex.UUCP> <318@longway.TIC.COM> <322@longway.TIC.COM>
Reply-To: uunet!auspex!guy (Guy Harris)
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 28
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

From: uunet!auspex!guy (Guy Harris)

>Probably.  But what about the existing applications that depend on the
>semantics of the older SVID?  Are they out of luck, or will they be somehow
>grandfathered in?

If you plan to run one of those applications:

	$ su
	Password:
	# #
	# # Optimizing this to run "chmod" only on directories with the
	# # set-GID bit set is left as an exercise for the reader.
	# #
	# find / -type d -exec chmod g-s {} ";"
	# exit

and live with the old semantics (and don't mount any remote file systems
that support the new semantics).  You may be able to restrict this to
only those directories in which the applications in question will create
files - how many such applications really exist?

If you don't want to, or can't, change the permissions on the
directories in question, then yes, I suspect those applications, and
you, are out of luck.  At best, there *might* be a binary-compatibility
hack, but I would not be surprised if there were none. 

Volume-Number: Volume 16, Number 25