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
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
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