From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <47A9D23A.80405@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:28:58 -0500 From: Daniel J Walsh MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Todd Miller CC: Stephen Smalley , Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus , SE Linux Subject: Re: Resend: Sudo Changes for SELinux References: <4784EFE8.9050106@redhat.com> <6FE441CD9F0C0C479F2D88F959B015880153F49C@exchange.columbia.tresys.com> <1199903006.9393.296.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <478670A8.5080902@redhat.com> <1199995291.3707.15.camel@vogon> <47877F43.5030401@redhat.com> <1200065528.29816.66.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <1200065923.29816.69.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <4787BF20.1050105@redhat.com> <47A08F44.20308@redhat.com> <6FE441CD9F0C0C479F2D88F959B015880181F138@exchange.columbia.tresys.com> In-Reply-To: <6FE441CD9F0C0C479F2D88F959B015880181F138@exchange.columbia.tresys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Todd Miller wrote: > Is there any reason sesh needs to fork()? If all you need is an > exec-time transition isn't it sufficient to just call exec()? > > - todd I don't recall, I wrote it several years ago. I guess the simplest thing is to try it out, without the fork. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkep0joACgkQrlYvE4MpobMkOwCffK19DmANMR/+Uy+XCXIFiyzF j6gAn1uUUrN3mq+R6MFYeeBwL/RzGlJR =IFrp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.