Re: 2.6-test4 Traditional pty and devfs

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 08:16:54PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > That's why I'm really keen on knowing how the system of the bugreporter
> > looks - this shouldn't happen without a very strange setup.
> 
> I've attached to the bugzilla bug my .config (its actually for -test2)
> and an ls -la /dev/pt*
> 
> Is there anything else you want to know?

That doesn't really help - if an application opens old-style pty's
directly the permissions can't work.  IF you care for them fill a
bugreport to ripperx that it should use openpty() from libc which
will fix the problem automatically.

Until then we should apply your patch to create the slaves on init
so the behaviour is consistant with 2.4 and 2.6 without devfs.

I was just wondering whether you were using an acient / stripped
down libc with the pt_chown helper removed.
-
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/
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 08:16:54PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > That's why I'm really keen on knowing how the system of the bugreporter
> > looks - this shouldn't happen without a very strange setup.
> 
> I've attached to the bugzilla bug my .config (its actually for -test2)
> and an ls -la /dev/pt*
> 
> Is there anything else you want to know?

That doesn't really help - if an application opens old-style pty's
directly the permissions can't work.  IF you care for them fill a
bugreport to ripperx that it should use openpty() from libc which
will fix the problem automatically.

Until then we should apply your patch to create the slaves on init
so the behaviour is consistant with 2.4 and 2.6 without devfs.

I was just wondering whether you were using an acient / stripped
down libc with the pt_chown helper removed.