On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 06:41:13 +0000, pouya+lists.net...@nohup.io wrote: > One difference I see with your code is that you don't seem to change > the controlling terminal in the child with setsid(2) and a TIOCSCTTY > ioctl(2).
I only need to feed some input to the terminal emulation code, so the scaffolding is minimal :). The child programs are usually just cat, printf, tputs. > It made no difference. In both cases running stty(1) with operands > "raw" or "-opost" are ineffective and OPOST remains set after > running them. [...] > I'm still puzzled as to why I can't disable OPOST programmatically > or using stty. > > FWIW I have set TERM=dumb in my terminal and that also seems to > affect input and output processing. The fact that TERM affects this is a sign that you likely have something like a shell with line-editing interfering as RVP suggested in another message. -uwe