> I would guess the behavior you just discovered has been
> known for a long time.
It doesn't mean that things will always be that way :-)
See here: http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-26-102215-1
> PS: Why should ps to work correctly without the setuid bit?
because all recent "ps" works without it, and remove bit from executable is
not a workaround in this case.
Maybe it's time to abandon the stone age :-)
Bye,
--
Andrea "bunker" Purificato
+++++++++++[>++++++>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>++++
++++++<<<-]>.>++++++++++.>.<----------.>---------.<+++++++.
> I would guess the behavior you just discovered has been
> known for a long time.
It doesn't mean that things will always be that way :-)
See here: http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-26-102215-1
> PS: Why should ps to work correctly without the setuid bit?
because all recent "ps" works without it, and remove bit from executable is
not a workaround in this case.
Maybe it's time to abandon the stone age :-)
Bye,
--
Andrea "bunker" Purificato
+++++++++++[>++++++>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>++++
++++++<<<-]>.>++++++++++.>.<----------.>---------.<+++++++.
http://rawlab.mindcreations.com
[ reply ]