Re: svn commit: r741862 - in /apr/apr/trunk: ./ include/ include/arch/unix/ locks/beos/ locks/netware/ locks/os2/ locks/unix/ locks/win32/ shmem/beos/ shmem/os2/ shmem/unix/ shmem/win32/ threadproc/beos/ threadproc/netware/ threadproc/os2/ threadproc/unix/...

[Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>]

On 02/07/2009 10:05 AM, mturk@apache.org wrote:
> Author: mturk
> Date: Sat Feb  7 09:05:54 2009
> New Revision: 741862
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=741862&view=rev
> Log:
> Add object perms set macros and implement them for shm and mutex
> 
> Added:
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_perms_set.h   (with props)
> Modified:
>     apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_global_mutex.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_proc_mutex.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_shm.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_thread_proc.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/arch/unix/apr_arch_proc_mutex.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/arch/unix/apr_arch_shm.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/include/arch/unix/apr_arch_threadproc.h
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/beos/proc_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/netware/proc_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/os2/proc_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/unix/global_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/unix/proc_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/locks/win32/proc_mutex.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/shmem/beos/shm.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/shmem/os2/shm.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/shmem/unix/shm.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/shmem/win32/shm.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/beos/proc.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/netware/proc.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/os2/proc.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/unix/proc.c
>     apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/win32/proc.c
> 

> Modified: apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/unix/proc.c
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/unix/proc.c?rev=741862&r1=741861&r2=741862&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/unix/proc.c (original)
> +++ apr/apr/trunk/threadproc/unix/proc.c Sat Feb  7 09:05:54 2009
> @@ -463,7 +463,19 @@
>                  _exit(-1);   /* We have big problems, the child should exit. */
>              }
>          }
> +        if (!geteuid()) {
> +            apr_procattr_pscb_t *c = attr->perms_set_callbacks;
>  
> +            while (c) {
> +                apr_status_t r;
> +                r = (*c->perms_set_fn)((void *)c->data, c->perms,
> +                                       attr->uid, attr->gid);
> +                if (r != APR_SUCCESS || r != APR_ENOTIMPL) {

This is always true isn't it?
I guess it should be (r != APR_SUCCESS && r != APR_ENOTIMPL)

> +                    _exit(-1);
> +                }
> +                c = c->next;
> +            }
> +        }
>          /* Only try to switch if we are running as root */
>          if (attr->gid != -1 && !geteuid()) {
>              if ((status = setgid(attr->gid))) {
> @@ -708,3 +720,20 @@
>  
>      return APR_SUCCESS;
>  }
> +
> +APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_procattr_perms_set_register(apr_procattr_t *attr,
> +                                                 apr_perms_setfn_t *perms_set_fn,
> +                                                 void *data,
> +                                                 apr_fileperms_t perms)
> +{
> +    apr_procattr_pscb_t *c;
> +
> +    c = apr_palloc(attr->pool, sizeof(apr_procattr_pscb_t));
> +    c->data = data;
> +    c->perms = perms;
> +    c->perms_set_fn = perms_set_fn;
> +    c->next = attr->perms_set_callbacks;
> +    attr->perms_set_callbacks = c;

Is it intended that we call the callback registered last first?

> +
> +    return APR_SUCCESS;
> +}
> 

Regards

Rüdiger