On 2007-10-02 15:41, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer
On 10/4/07, Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-10-02 15:41, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch
On 2007-10-04 18:05, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/4/07, Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-10-02 15:41, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with
Steven Hartland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks for the tip there but I cant find any function called pty_create_slave
in the source.
Just grep your source tree for occurrences of pqrsPQRS.
Is this something that's possible on 5.x / 6.2 or something that will need a
lot of work?
It
Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
workaround a limit on the number of pty's, surely there's a way to increase
this?
Regards
Steve
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
hang-on-close bug in the pts code (if it hasn't been fixed already)
Looks like it hasn't been. A friend who tried to set up an access
server for
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 02:05:03PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Steven Hartland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
workaround a limit on the
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
hang-on-close bug in the pts code (if it hasn't been fixed already)
Looks like it
Steven Hartland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
workaround a limit on the number of pty's, surely there's a way to increase
this?
You need to
On 10/2/07, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
hang-on-close bug in the pts code
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven Hartland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
workaround a limit on the number of
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the hang-on-close bug.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the hang-on-close bug.
Strangely enough, me
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the hang-on-close bug.
On 10/2/07, Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce
* Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which
* Ed Schouten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
he can catch up with the thread.
Which
Ed Schouten [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is a known issue IIRC. See line 245 of tty_pts.c 1.16. Can be
easily reproduced by killing the sshd while apps are still running in
the shell.
It's not that simple. The question is why t_refcnt 1 when there are
no processes left attached to the tty.
Thanks for the tip there but I cant find any function called pty_create_slave
in the source.
N.B. Machine is running 5.4 but I also looked on 6.2 which we could upgrade
to but still couldn't find it, so I assume you may be talking about something
that's in current which we couldn't risk on this
20 matches
Mail list logo
