X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Authenticated:	#27081556
X-Provags-ID:	V01U2FsdGVkX1+lvBUxWyilWMWCJ71gASz+sxVwYyjPYF5tzVSbjb
	XV0rD2SyVTF8dk
From:	Juan Manuel Guerrero <juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	setegid/seteuid and setresgid/setresuid implementation
Date:	Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:27:47 +0100
User-Agent:	KMail/1.9.10
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-Id:	<200911250227.47642.juan.guerrero@gmx.de>
X-Y-GMX-Trusted:	0
X-FuHaFi:	0.78
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Is there a reason why getegid and geteuid have been implemented but neither
setegid nor seteuid?  At the same time the pairs getgid/setgid and getuid/setuid
have been implemented.  The reason why I am asking is that I need an implementation
of getresgid/setresgid and getresuid/setresuid to port m4 1.4.13.
If neither setegid nor seteuid have been implemented because it is not possible
then I assume that an implementation of setresgid and setresuid for djgpp is
also impossible.

Regards,
Juan M. Guerrero

- Raw text -