Re: sslio as a STARTTLS wrapper (was Re: sslio error description incomplete/wrong)

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Scott Gifford wrote:

> Charlie Brady <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > It's my impression that SIGCONT is the only signal we can send
> > across uid boundaries (presuming that both smtpd and sslio have
> > changed uid), and then only if the processes are in the same session
> > (as I think they would be here). I can't think of how we'd send two
> > different messages ("take over", "die") with that one signal.
> 
> Ah, you're right, a quick test confirms that.  Using SIGCONT seems
> quite kludgey, though I can't think of any other reason than
> aesthetics not to use it.  Well, maybe portability.

What about the reason I've given above?

---
Charlie