Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 14:00:01 -0800 (PST) From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-bugs Subject: Re: bin/2747: at cannot be run in an atjob Message-ID: <199702172200.OAA18446@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/2747; it has been noted by GNATS. From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: thompson@tgsoft.com (mark thompson) Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bin/2747: at cannot be run in an atjob Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 22:29:26 +0100 As mark thompson wrote: > People might consider this a feature. :-) So you can't defeat a > cron.deny entry with just an at.allow one. > > I take it from the ascii winky that you are joking. Yep. > No, sorry, the preference of getlogin() over LOGNAME is a normal > sequence. getlogin() is much harder to fake. > > The comment 'which reads /etc/utmp' does not suggest that it is a > holdover from previous times? A holdover from Linux, where our at(1) originates from. I think atrun(8) should rather call setlogin(), the at(1) falling over the missing login name is only one examle of a failing program -- there might be more of them. > ps. Now mind you - atrun has a buffer size overflow problem in the > fscanf that reads this... Umpf. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702172200.OAA18446>