On Sun, 24 Aug 2008, Ed Schouten wrote:
The current /etc/ttys already seemed like an improvement when compared to
the old one, where we spent 2 out of 3 entries on commonly unused PTY
names. What kind of ratio do you propose?
For 256 lines in /etc/ttys, you can keep people's systems working with
older applications. Doesn't seem like a big sacrifice -- it's not like
we're forcing Giant to be kept on part of the kernel, etc.
Okay. Sounds okay. That means we've basically switched the priorities. First
we had:
- 512 entries for pty(4)
- 256 entries for pts(4)
Now we're going to switch it to:
- 256 entries for pty(4)
- 512 entries for pts(4)
I'll only add the entries for tty[pqrsPQRS].
John and I chatted a bit last night, and we think reordering introduces a
potential short-term ABI confusion until the next reboot, but that once a
reboot takes place the problem is resolved. This is consistent with other
weird things happening if you upgrade /etc without rebooting, so this seems
OK.
Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
