> "Peter" == Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> [Miles Bader]
>> I'd say so. Or fix the bug.
Peter> Kind of quick and dirty, and not particularly tested, since
Peter> I don't actually know how to use ttysnoop.
Peter> But it's a proof of concept of how eas
[Brian May]
> > See bug #87371. The title is wrong. devfs is not the issue,
> > /dev/pts is (I think). I don't think there is any intention to fix
> > the bug. Over 4 years old. Perhaps this is grounds to drop the
> > package from Debian.
[Miles Bader]
> I'd say so. Or fix the bug.
Kind of qu
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> See bug #87371. The title is wrong. devfs is not the issue, /dev/pts
> is (I think). I don't think there is any intention to fix the
> bug. Over 4 years old. Perhaps this is grounds to drop the package
> from Debian.
I'd say so. Or fix the bug.
-miles
--
> "Miles" == Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Miles> In any case, does anyone else know if there are really such old
Miles> applications still around?
snoopy:/etc/postfix# apt-cache show ttysnoop
Package: ttysnoop
Priority: optional
Section: admin
Installed-Size: 52
Maintainer:
Le lundi 07 novembre 2005 à 14:06 +0100, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> On Nov 07, Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> > > not even know where to find one).
> > At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys an
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> /dev/{pts/,ptmx} are so trivial to support (in applications) that I
> think it's worthwhile to disable legacy BSD pty support in Debian
> kernels, and fix whatever still breaks. That is, unless we think there
> are still a significant number of third-p
[Ian Campbell]
> It's to support older applications which don't know about the
> /dev/pyts/ interface. Whether the legacy device nodes come from a
> static /dev or from udev doesn't really enter in to it.
/dev/{pts/,ptmx} are so trivial to support (in applications) that I
think it's worthwhile to
On Nov 07, Christopher Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This fixes both rtc and floppy. I'm assuming that the root of the problem
> here is the kernel? No surprise if that's the case. But thanks for coming
> up with a workaround. Hopefully there aren't too many more of these issues
> lurking
Miles Bader wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
>>>I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
>>>that don't use udev, right?
>>
>>Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
>>not even know where to find one).
>
>
> I was
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>> I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
>> that don't use udev, right?
>
> Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> not even know where to find one).
I was thinking about the case where so
On Nov 07, Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> > not even know where to find one).
> At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys and this is not
Actually it does.
> documented anywhere. I needed some time
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 01:30:56PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> not even know where to find one).
At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys and this is not
documented anywhere. I needed some time to figure out
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:03 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> >> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and normally
> >> /dev/pts gets used for ptys, but with the new kernel there were suddenly
> >> about 10 zillion old-style pty-related device
On Nov 07, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So tell the kernel team to stop enabling CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYS.
> I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
> that don't use udev, right?
Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
not ev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and normally
>> /dev/pts gets used for ptys, but with the new kernel there were suddenly
>> about 10 zillion old-style pty-related device nodes -- /dev/[pt]ty[a-z][0-9]
>
> So tell the kernel team to
On Nov 07, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to work OK, but the weird thing is that I got a bunch of random
> useless device nodes in /dev as a result, and I'm not entirely sure
> where they're coming from.
The kernel.
> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and
I usually compile my own kernels (using make-kpkg), but recently I
decided to try a standard debian package of 2.6.14, since it was up
before I got around to it. [This is from unstable]
It seems to work OK, but the weird thing is that I got a bunch of random
useless device nodes in /dev as a resu
17 matches
Mail list logo
