lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PTS alocation problem with 2.6.4/2.6.5
Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > You need a glibc upgrade - we broke things for really old glibc's. We're
> > (slowly) working on fixing it up.
>
> Looking at patch-2.6.4, there are plenty of minor changes to the pty
> code but nothing that looks like it would break userspace except for
> _very_ old glibcs that don't know about /dev/pts at all and just used
> the legacy ones.
>
> I have some _non-glibc_ pty code that I wish to keep working. Can you
> briefly explain how it breaks with moderately old glibcs such as the
> glibc-2.3.3 that's said to be inadequate, and therefore what interface
> change is needed in non-glibc code?
>

Andrzej is using a glibc that "does not support minors > 255".

The oldest glibc I have around here is glibc-2.2.5-34 and it passes
Andrzej's `for a in $(seq 4);do ssh -t remote tty;done' test OK. I do not
know at which version they started to permit larger values for minors, but
it must have been some time ago.

A small number of people are hurting from the removal of first-fit pty
allocation and I do think it needs to be put back. I have a patch but
neither Peter nor I have actually tested it yet. I'll aim to get it into
2.6.6.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.027 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site