From owner-freebsd-bugs  Sat Apr  1 12:52:27 1995
Return-Path: bugs-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id MAA29274 for bugs-outgoing; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 12:52:27 -0800
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA29265 for <freebsd-bugs@freefall.cdrom.com>; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 12:52:23 -0800
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id GAA20113; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 06:50:12 +1000
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 06:50:12 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199504012050.GAA20113@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: freebsd-bugs@freefall.cdrom.com, j@uriah.heep.sax.de
Subject: Re: kern/290: latest sio change broke slattach(8)
Sender: bugs-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>The latest sio changes obviously broke the SLIP line discipline.
>Slattach(8) complains:

>Apr  1 21:48:55 uriah slattach[150]: cannot get carrier state: Inappropriate ioctl for device
>Apr  1 21:48:55 uriah slattach[150]: Waiting for carrier on /dev/cuaa1 (sl-1)

I'll fix this in a few minutes.  sltioctl() now returns ENOTTY for ioctls
that it doesn't know about.  It's supposed to return -1 like it used to so
that such ioctls can be handled by higher layer(s).

BTW, slioctl() (a different function) returns EINVAL for ioctls that it
doesn't know about.  Shouldn't it return ENOTTY?

Bruce