Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > + - SANITY > + > + Test is not run by root user, and an attempt to write to an > + unwritable file is expected to fail correctly. As I said in the previous round, I am indeed in favor of having a single "running as root---code that expects that the normal UNIXy permission based protection to apply, aka 'running in sane environment', will not work correctly" prerequisite token, rather than having separate "can I expect an unwritable file to be unwritable?" "can I expect an unreadble file to be unreadable?" bits. The name of the token _might_ be subject to debate (I am fine with either SANITY or NOROOT), but the explanation should mention this is defined to be a bit more broad than "unWRITABLE", I think. "test -w /" is a traditional way to approximately check if you are running as root (technically, it only checks if you are running with unduly high privilege---your sysadm _could_ have done "chmod 2775 /" and made it owned by the admin group). But that is just a nitpick on the wording we could fix if necessary. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html