Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 08:10:03 +0200 From: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> To: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: How to increase the max pty's on Freebsd 7.0? Message-ID: <20090402061003.GR13393@hoeg.nl> In-Reply-To: <20090401215308.GA91493@psconsult.nl> References: <A48E38AADF784030A7496551F1416A3B@multiplay.co.uk> <20090401205306.GO13393@hoeg.nl> <20090401205703.GX31897@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20090401210835.GP13393@hoeg.nl> <20090401215308.GA91493@psconsult.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--cEobB2knsyc5ebfU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
* Paul Schenkeveld <fb-hackers@psconsult.nl> wrote:
> Or change 'pts' to, for example, 'pt' so without changing utmp and
> related stuff we'll have space for a four digit pty number.
I've noticed lots of apps already misbehave because of the pty(4) ->
pts(4) migration. I guess using a new naming scheme would totally break
stuff. There are lots of apps that do things like:
if (strncmp(tty, "tty", 3) !=3D 0 && strncmp(tty, "pts/", 4) !=3D 0)
printf("Not a valid pseudo-terminal!\n");
But those are just workarounds. Our utmp format is broken anyway. It's
not just UT_LINESIZE that's too small. I think we received many
complaints from people who want to increase UT_HOSTSIZE as well.
--=20
Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>
WWW: http://80386.nl/
--cEobB2knsyc5ebfU
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAknUVrsACgkQ52SDGA2eCwVf7gCbBaCDXQqUoob9km1Ez91GE+V8
MsEAnizIY204sjtjc6l260HG9nfPY4D/
=bq9R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--cEobB2knsyc5ebfU--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090402061003.GR13393>