DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 60GAQEKJ2541641
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 60GAQEKJ2541641
Authentication-Results: delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=cZ74A85z
X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 480DF4BA2E2A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1768559173;
	bh=bAILCcfnS15o69Y+qGtWIGxvVMLymat1Dx3DQ/cgpuc=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	 From;
	b=cZ74A85zY5EPBbPxTMaXebylaSDjng7PmgQ6oNL2PYfYcR7zw9BVEw1+r8gAPeISk
	 Zu2BXo/59fqH3K5xZwYkBWJbD9ugZF6QJltGRfupE5nnkpe/li3/akIyn3R5iTMHQt
	 gFYmxlMetLgXn//UJo0b+M+vq34ftxXob1lkokPs=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5E6C04BA2E1C
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 11:25:25 +0100
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin 3.6.6-1
Message-ID: <aWoSFRfeKnOzggeD@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20260109194027 DOT 293669-1-corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
 <b7767cbd-5b00-4be7-97a5-731a8bdc77a1 AT gmail DOT com>
 <aWTCxt7wPA1ZwWyZ AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <53333e15-802b-47f3-b193-49d631ee23a7 AT gmail DOT com>
 <aWTQNthe6ZNfp0LM AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <98e6caf7-250b-440b-bfa4-51cd2d89cc0e AT gmail DOT com>
 <aWjHpW_AajfOKcQl AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <20260115201448 DOT 2cb7b72e4dd0e26b5ad2c093 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
 <aWk-lhoLkdDoErvD AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <aWk-lhoLkdDoErvD@calimero.vinschen.de>
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Jan 15 20:23, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> On Jan 15 20:14, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > Hi Corinna,
> > 
> > I also could reproduce the issue.
> > [...]
> > Local. In the mintty terminal opened after
> > cygserver is started. In the mintty terminal opened
> > after cygserver is stopped, the gid is as expected.
> > 
> > The terminal already opened at the time cygserver is
> > started/stopped is not affected.
> > [...]
> > > If you stop all Cygwin processes and restart cygserver, is the primary
> > > group still as expected?
> > 
> > No.
> 
> So running cygserver suppresses changing the primary group?  That's
> weird, because the effect seems so arbitrary.
> 
> Did you try to debug that?

I just took a stab and I can reproduce this easily.  It looks like the
culprit is this condition in internal_getlogin():

  if (!cygheap->pg.nss_cygserver_caching ())
     internal_getgroups (0, NULL, &cldap);

This skips the internal_getgroups() call if cygserver is running.

If I just drop the condition and call internal_getgroups() every time,
it works for me even with cygserver running.

I changed this expression to exclude the internal_getgroups() call back
in 2014, and, as was typical at the time, the ChangeLog entry only
explains *what* I was doing, but not *why*.

The result is that I have no idea anymore why I did this.  Dropping the
condition *might* have unfortunate side effects, mainly on the
performance side in scenarios with remote ADs, but, honestly, I don't
know.  And it would only affect cygserver users, all the others would
already have the same performance.  So it might not be a bad idea to
drop it, all things considered.

I can make this change and you can all try the test release and if
this works fine for you, I can release Cygwin 3.6.7 soonish, is that
ok with everyone?


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
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