From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 26 15:02:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA07952 for current-outgoing; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 15:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA07945 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 15:02:07 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA28995; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 15:47:52 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199703262247.PAA28995@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: 2.2R (src 2.2 211): == dialing To: rb@gid.co.uk (Bob Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 15:47:52 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, bde@zeta.org.au, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de In-Reply-To: from "Bob Bishop" at Mar 26, 97 10:25:05 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >[...] > >It should be possible to > >distinguish a process which has made a tty it's controlling tty > >in order to get device events as signals, and a process which > >has a controlling tty because it is interactive. > > Do you mean "a process which has no controlling tty should be able to open > a tty without that automatically becoming its controlling tty"? If not, > please explain. I mean it should be possible to have two processes that are the only processes on their (-CLOCAL) tty, such that: process DCD-on-to-off shutdown-tty-revoke 1 Gets SIGHUP Gets SIGHUP 2 Gets SIGHUP DOESN'T get SIGHUP And that slattch should be set up like process 2. >From Bruce's last posting, it looks like the SIGHUP is resulting from an explicit SIGHUP send rather than as a result of the tty being revoked. If so, this may be purely a problem in the shutdown code and not a problem in the tty code at all (depends on how the revoke acts in regard to a "process 2" type process, assuming slattach is set up as a "process 2" type process. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.