Darren Reed wrote:

> Elad, how would you have solved this problem and also
> achieved the side benefit of opening up use of NGROUPS
> to become a tunable rather than a constant?

since when is the 16bit group limit that horrible?? does dsl@ have long
term plans wrt/group handling? if so, where were they published? I don't
recall neither him or you taking part in the discussion about nested
groups we had long time ago.

the two issues are completely orthogonal. the change was done originally
to save a malloc. that is a very, very weak argument. the "side benefit"
has no effect whatsoever and you know that very well.

since I am not responsible for the breakage of this subsystem, I am not
going to spend a second trying to think a way to achieve the benefit
without paying the cost. if you want my opinion, then please revert the
commits and *then* we can have a purely technical discussion.

-e.