freebsd-questions-local at be-well.no-ip.com
Thu Jul 17 08:10:53 PDT 2003
"Gerald S. Stoller" <gs_stoller at hotmail.com> writes:
> FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE #0: Sat Apr 21 10:54:49 GMT 2001
> jkh at narf.osd.bsdi.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/GENERIC i386
> When working in a Unix system, I like to work with several
> windows (if possible) and organize my work among them. I use xterm
> (as on the line 'xterm &') to open new windows. Recently, I wanted
> to check on my processes and issued the command 'ps -l' and was
> surprised to not find any xterm processes among them. So I issued
> the command 'ps -la' and there I found the xterm processes but they
> were owned by root , not by me who had issued the command. Even
> though I wasn▓t listed *by the ▒ps √la▓ command as the
> owner, I could still kill the xterm processes. I don▓t know
> where the incongruity is, in the kernel▓s tables or in the
> reporting by ps .
> In multi-user (commercial) systems, I believe that the user
> who invokes the xterm processes is (listed as) its owner.
> I prefer that all processes running in FreeBSD be owned by
> the user who invoked them, the exceptions being some system ( root )
> processes used in the login process. (The xterm processes are
> included here as non-system processes, so they should be owned by the
> user who invoked them.) I would like to see FreeBSD changed to
> reflect this, but the bug reporting site is down now. If anyone knows
> of any reasons why the current operation is correct and should be left
> as is, please inform me.
xterm is suid-root, because it needs to open a terminal. The *shell*
running in the xterm should be owned by the user, but the user doesn't
have sufficient permissions for opening the terminal.
I believe you're wrong about X behaving otherwise on other Unix
More information about the freebsd-questions