From owner-freebsd-current Tue Feb 11 03:43:56 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA16605 for current-outgoing; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 03:43:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from perki0.connect.com.au (perki0.connect.com.au [192.189.54.85]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA16598 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 03:43:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from nemeton.UUCP (Unemeton@localhost) by perki0.connect.com.au with UUCP id WAA05694 (8.7.6h/IDA-1.6); Tue, 11 Feb 1997 22:37:24 +1100 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: perki0.connect.com.au: Unemeton set sender to giles@nemeton.com.au using -f Received: from localhost.nemeton.com.au (localhost.nemeton.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by nemeton.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA12347; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 22:36:46 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199702111136.WAA12347@nemeton.com.au> To: John-Mark Gurney cc: asami@cs.berkeley.edu, freebsd-gnats-submit@freefall.freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: bin/777 patch had problems with closed tty... In-reply-to: Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 22:36:45 +1100 From: Giles Lean Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 00:30:02 -0800 (PST) John-Mark Gurney wrote: > comments? is it ok if we change the default?? > I don't like changing the default. I'd rather see no fix than do this. I sent in an alternative patch that is ugly but does solve the problem without much code change. Giles