This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: ATTN: daemon maintainers -- proposed csih changes [Was: Re: [ITP] tftp-hpa 5.0]
On 11/15/2010 12:14 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 15 10:36, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> Does that sound like a good plan?
> Step #3
> It sounds like a plan, but I think it's too complicated. The sole
> purpose of the csih_is_nt2003 was to check for certain properties of the
> OS. XP64 shares the properties of 2K3, it's the same kernel. So it
> should be possible to redefine csih_is_nt2003 as just kernel>=5.2 and be
> done with it. Am I missing some other use of csih_is_nt2003?
Accuracy: I don't know why anyone would want to use
^^^^ these are all defined as "true if OS is equal or greater than ..."
vvvv there require exact version matching
but they are provided, and they should give correct answers. Right now,
csih_is_nt2003 is giving incorrect results according to its definition.
However, in practice it is *operating* as needed since people are using
it as a proxy for "system account is crippled" -- and for that purpose
its value, if not its name, is accurate. (And, this is *my* fault,
because everybody simply copied my original sample "port" of sshd-config
I could just rename it (csih_nt_kernel_is_5p2) but nobody would
understand that -- and it would still require a transition period for
clients to change their usage.
Obviously, the easiest solution is to just document the current behavior:
... with the exception of csih_is_nt2003, which true for both 64bit
Windows XP, as well as NT Server 2003 and higher, since XP64 shares the
same kernel as (64bit) NT2003. See email thread blah for more
and update the messages about privileged users in the documentation and
warning messages (which needs to be done, regardless).
Really, this is what I get for violating autoconf's recommendations when
"designing" csih: never base capability tests on OS version numbers;
test for and indicate the capabilities themselves...