Re: Does anyone still care about BSD ptys?

[bill davidsen]

In article <20040209100940.GF21151@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
 <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 08:59:39AM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
| > In article <c07c67$vrs$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
| > H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > >Does anyone still care about old-style BSD ptys, i.e. /dev/pty*?  I'm
| > >thinking of restructuring the pty system slightly to make it more
| > >dynamic and to make use of the new larger dev_t, and I'd like to get
| > >rid of the BSD ptys as part of the same patch.
| > 
| > bootlogd(8) which is used by Debian and Suse is started as the
| > first thing at boottime. It needs a pty, and tries to use /dev/pts
| > if it's there but falls back to BSD style pty's if /dev/pts isn't
| > mounted - which will be the case 99% of the time.
| 
| So what's the problem with calling mount(2)?

Other than making an optional part of the kernel required... Not
impossible but something to consider.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/