On 02/05/2013 06:08 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On 6/02/2013 3:58 a.m., Simone Levy wrote: >> should this issue be reported as a bug or otherwise dealt with? > It is already reported as http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3763 Amos, bug 3763 is not about setuid(0) warnings, although both bugs may have been caused by the same Coverity-inspired motivation to check the return values of system calls. Simone, yes, I think you should report the setuid warning bug. If you do, please note that it appears to be BSD-specific. Thank you, Alex. > The change in 3.2.7 was simply to report several error conditions which > were being silently discarded without explanation. We need to find out > properly what the shm -1 are meaning before a proper fix can be comitted. > > Amos
