Bug#317747: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#317747: su -m / suspend / fg broken with zsh

2005-07-11 Thread Alexander Gattin
tags 317747 confirmed thanks On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 02:08:26 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this bug has been introduced since 1:4.0.3-35 ... perhaps related to the fix for #314727. This claim needs to be verified. with zsh as your shell, this sequence is busted: I see

Bug#317747: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#317747: su -m / suspend / fg broken with zsh

2005-07-11 Thread Alexander Gattin
Hi! On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:32:17 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: at first i tried just adding the setpgrp... You mean if(setpgrp()) exit(1);? but with that the su'd zsh doesn't ever seem to wake up. so i threw in the TIOCSPGRP calls to pass the tty pgrp to the su'd zsh...

Bug#317747: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#317747: su -m / suspend / fg broken with zsh

2005-07-11 Thread Alexander Gattin
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:07:15 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: both pids 4788 and 4789 have pgrp 4788. when zsh suspends itself it sends SIGTSTP to -4788. this TSTP hits both zsh(4789) and su(4788) -- which causes zsh(4782) to finish its waitpid (it was waiting on su(4788)).

Bug#317747: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#317747: su -m / suspend / fg broken with zsh

2005-07-11 Thread Alexander Gattin
tags 317747 pending thanks As I already said, I'd just prefer to block/ignore several signals like TSTP. I did the same as in src/newgrp.c in our current shadow. I don't currently want to use sigprocmask() in su. Most probably I'll do the same as in upstream Hopefully we will release an

Bug#317747: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#317747: su -m / suspend / fg broken with zsh

2005-07-11 Thread dean gaudet
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Alexander Gattin wrote: As I already said, I'd just prefer to block/ignore several signals like TSTP. Most probably I'll do the same as in upstream -- block everything (except TERM and ALRM) until exit... yeah after i stopped hacking and went to bed this popped into my