Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 16:04:15 -0400
From: Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've checked in a different fix for this to libc 2.1, that I think is
correct and avoids some more busy-work. But I have not tested this code at
all beyond compiling it, so please let me know how it is.
I've checked in a different fix for this to libc 2.1, that I think is
correct and avoids some more busy-work. But I have not tested this code at
all beyond compiling it, so please let me know how it is. I think the
comments in the new code explain the rationale.
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 19:57:19 +0200
From: Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I believe the appended libc change is necessary. However this is not
enough to fix screen. For some perverse reason (probably to work
around a bug on some old BSD systems) screen does a TIOCSTTY ioctl
right af
> The problem is, with this patch screen stops working again (same symptoms as
> before, maybe setsid() stopped working again).
Sigh. Please send us a fresh test case (simple program) that you have
verified exhibits the bug with the current libc and hurd.
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 12:16:55AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 22:22:46 +0200 (CEST)
>From: Mark Kettenis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>There something else going on. I'll try to debug the problem and see
>if I can come up with a solution.
>
> I think I found the
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 18:39:31 -0400
From: Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
D'oh! Ok, I reverted that change and checked in your other fix to login.
But why did the extra ioctl do harm?
I never get a login prompt when the extra ioctl is present. The
reason is that the TIOCSTTY fa
D'oh! Ok, I reverted that change and checked in your other fix to login.
But why did the extra ioctl do harm?
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 22:22:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mark Kettenis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
There something else going on. I'll try to debug the problem and see
if I can come up with a solution.
I think I found the problem. `getty' sets the controlling terminal,
but `login' doesn't pass it
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 12:55:20 -0400
From: Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> After installation of a new libc with these changes, programs started
> from the console have stopped responding to ^C. The output from `ps'
> seems to indicate that there is no controlling terminal.
> After installation of a new libc with these changes, programs started
> from the console have stopped responding to ^C. The output from `ps'
> seems to indicate that there is no controlling terminal. Shouldn't we
> set the controlling terminal in `runttys' (after doing the `setsid')?
Hmm. I t
On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 03:42:23PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> After installation of a new libc with these changes, programs started
> from the console have stopped responding to ^C. The output from `ps'
> seems to indicate that there is no controlling terminal. Shouldn't we
> set the contro
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 04:42:22 -0400
From: Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have checked in some libc changes with this log entry:
1999-09-17 Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* hurd/port2fd.c (_hurd_port2fd): Never change CTTYID port.
* sys
> On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 07:05:12AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > Well, Thomas and I uncovered some bugs.
>
> Is there a public place that you and Thomas discuss Hurd-ish stuff?
Well, this stuff was discussed on this very list, and tracked in the BTS.
We do have an internal list for discus
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 07:05:12AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Well, Thomas and I uncovered some bugs.
Is there a public place that you and Thomas discuss Hurd-ish stuff? I
know that I learned alot about Glibc, the linux kernel and a number of
the "sourceware" packages at cygnus by watching
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 07:05:12AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Then, my example won't still work as under Linux. In particular, the read()
> > call does not return (I am not even sure it should).
>
> Well, Thomas and I uncovered some bugs. And I thought I had reproduced
> your problem the ot
> Then, my example won't still work as under Linux. In particular, the read()
> call does not return (I am not even sure it should).
Well, Thomas and I uncovered some bugs. And I thought I had reproduced
your problem the other night. But now, after fixing the obvious bug in
your test program (re
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 04:42:22AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Please let me know if that fixes the setsid problem for you or not.
> I have not had a chance to test it yet.
First, you need to #include , or it won't compile
(reference to _hurd_dtable_lock).
Secondly, the process group is return
17 matches
Mail list logo
