Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:13:23 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Future ntsec-detection problem in sshd (Re: winsup/cygwin ChangeLog security.cc)
Message-ID: <20020727161323.GH16216@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20020725170413 DOT 3469 DOT qmail AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> <005d01c23417$27a656e0$0100a8c0 AT wdg DOT uk DOT ibm DOT com> <20020726102233 DOT V3921 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <021301c234eb$a8d6bf00$0100a8c0 AT wdg DOT uk DOT ibm DOT com> <20020727111609 DOT O3921 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <013001c23570$993c7280$0100a8c0 AT wdg DOT uk DOT ibm DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <013001c23570$993c7280$0100a8c0@wdg.uk.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 01:40:50PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 10:23:45PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>>>Perhaps is would be better to add a 'bool is_ntsec_enabled();' function
>>>to cygwin1.dll?
>>
>>Perhaps.  OTOH I'd have to load that function dynamically inside of
>>sshd so that it still runs on older versions of the Cygwin dll.  And if
>>the function doesn't exist, I'd have to check ntsec still using the old
>>method.  Hmm.
>
>If people are upgrading ssh surely they should also be upgrading cygwin
>as well?  Is there any reason to support people trying to use old
>cygwin1.dll versions with newly released cygwin software?

Breaking backwards compatibility gratuitously is not desirable.

In this case however, this could be implemented as a "cygwin_internal" function
anyway, which would mean not having to worry about loading the function.

However, checking the cygwin api version should be sufficient too.  That's
what it is there for.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/