---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>
Date: Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: Naming of "real" and "effective" ID procedures
To: John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>

You accidentally sent this off-list.

On 14.08.2019 23.49, John Cowan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:18 AM Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io
> <mailto:xxxxxx@lassi.io>> wrote:
>     I always thought the term "real user ID" is misleading: it sounds like
>     the exact opposite of what it is.
> The term means the real human user, the one sitting at the keyboard and
> screen, as opposed to the one they are pretending to be for purposes of
> privilege.  It's somewhat misleading in modern practice to call 0 a real
> user id, because nobody "really is" root any more, but certainly it was
> true in the past: I have received email from "xxxxxx@unicode.org
> <mailto:xxxxxx@unicode.org>" that obviously came from a human being.
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:24 AM <xxxxxx@ancell-ent.com
> <mailto:xxxxxx@ancell-ent.com>> wrote:
>     Note the current SRFI draft has removed the effective ID get
>     procedures, we need an "official" decision that they belong back in
>     it, due to our deciding they're mostly harmless without their
>     corresponding setters, which will stay removed.
> If "official" means "from me", then it's official.
> John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan xxxxxx@ccil.org
> <mailto:xxxxxx@ccil.org>
> I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less
> than half of you half as well as you deserve.  --Bilbo