From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <fweimer@redhat.com>
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com
 (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2756F398A435
 for <libc-help@sourceware.org>; Wed,  9 Jun 2021 06:41:23 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 2756F398A435
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com
 [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id
 us-mta-376-L1cvcfInNWyM62Ib02EywA-1; Wed, 09 Jun 2021 02:41:19 -0400
X-MC-Unique: L1cvcfInNWyM62Ib02EywA-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
 [10.5.11.16])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D49C218D6A2C;
 Wed,  9 Jun 2021 06:41:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-115-60.ams2.redhat.com
 [10.36.115.60])
 by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C80FD5C1C2;
 Wed,  9 Jun 2021 06:41:17 +0000 (UTC)
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Godmar Back via Libc-help <libc-help@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: supporting terminal ownership assignment (tcsetpgrp()) in
 posix_spawn
References: <CAB4+JYJBiMLz7ZscY+7Z811RgDV2qAZgu4cB0TsOiyvwMDE2hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7298cb72-becb-80bb-b2df-d97bdb201e95@linaro.org>
 <CAB4+JYKuGdm0XZ=3eB+-xeU-kV=Myx2WLSXg3F97J3DMem_-LQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <cad74bcf-feea-ffa1-3999-1d486dbd9e08@linaro.org>
 <CAB4+JYK9cfPRHOtDetNTHAkiiZqXr9n_Fc8GdGiGnSQr=+UfKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <aefb9695-678b-0dd5-ff02-7cb04d5f128b@linaro.org>
 <CAB4+JYLhNCwTKU0M29i04LuDzXPPHhgcH0MQDwnAdmwBH_nuMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <11145e53-3fbc-0f04-33f8-b2d9981f0ea8@linaro.org>
 <CAB4+JYJwW5i881HFgSwKG1ChcHjNpiBf-S3t=4JrFejCKwNxfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 08:41:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAB4+JYJwW5i881HFgSwKG1ChcHjNpiBf-S3t=4JrFejCKwNxfw@mail.gmail.com>
 (Godmar Back via Libc-help's message of "Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:11:33
 -0400")
Message-ID: <87tum78rqs.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
 DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: libc-help@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libc-help mailing list <libc-help.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libc-help>,
 <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-help/>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libc-help>,
 <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 06:41:24 -0000

* Godmar Back via Libc-help:

> I haven't checked how the current implementation works. Do you use a
> pipe or something for the child to report back if something went
> wrong, or does the parent somehow check if the asked-for actions in
> the child will likely succeed?  If the former, doing setsid first, and
> then, if given, doing the tcsetpgrp call will fail as you say and this
> failure would be reported back to the caller. Then they know they've
> misused the API.

It's the first.  We use shared memory (the side effect of vfork) to
communicate errno to the original process.

Thanks,
Florian