X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9CDD13857703 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1681872019; bh=6NsV2WdMaHFbc7ef99gglTYUL0NpMnJ635qSXHNlVFg=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=my2QvNF/ar/u4Ia0ma/JwvtU84VUCx9RVjwKBkqzLe2QQG3B+LxpSf1vp/dVsc1nd Mb+uT+ItSLfxjiJK276G9XfpxnYXDA/OQJXCZbi8epyWmwfaYB7oT193oitR2sp4gx V7fTzjdUuvvn4XA3nxs11gjHh6mVAuD4yTJ/LI9I= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6AC3A3858D39 X-MC-Unique: E1sKYz5vM0-ZgGfXhnpOxw-1 Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 21:39:56 -0500 To: Bruno Haible Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: posix_spawn facility Message-ID: References: <1752276 DOT 7aRn1RRit1 AT nimes> <1741636 DOT G7SD5HZVK5 AT nimes> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1741636.G7SD5HZVK5@nimes> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20230407 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eric Blake via Cygwin Reply-To: Eric Blake Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Errors-To: cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com Sender: "Cygwin" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 33J2ehrJ020574 On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 12:10:34AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote: > Eric Blake wrote: > > we now have implementations in the wild that differ in behavior, and > > use security as a reason for the divergence, it is worth getting that > > clarified in POSIX. I'll file a bug against POSIX shortly > > For the reference, the systems that return ENOEXEC for posix_spawnp > attempting to execute a script without #! marker are: > - glibc/Linux ≥ 2.15 > - glibc/Hurd ≥ 2.33 (commit 13adfa34aff03fd9f1c1612b537a0d736ddb6c2b) > - musl libc POSIX issue now filed as https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1674; although we'll have to see if my wording is acceptable or if it settles on something a bit looser (such as implementation-defined as to whether an sh fallback is attempted, rather than outright forbidden). -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple