> What Alan /actually/ suggested was that I make a syscall that acts similarly
> to pipe() except for ttys.
Well, perhaps Alan should post a message to the list describing exactly
what he's looking for?
My personal belief is that /dev/dpty is trying to address little parts of
too many problems. The 256-minors problem exists, and should be addressed
head-on (64-bit kdev_t or devfs) instead of hacked around in a different
manner for every device.
Should I implement a syscall that gives me a fd for the 257th disk
partition device, or for th 257th serial port?
> What I came up with and have implemented and solves all the security
> problems CLEANLY
Quite a claim. Perhaps you'd like to explain your security policy in more
detail?
> 'sides, I bothered to write this and I'll be damned if I'm gonna use
> some halfway backwards compatable solution just because it's standard. We
> both know this standard isn't entrenched enough to be worth much more than
> each sysad setting up his own scheme, which is what it has amounted to up
> until now.
I hardly think Solaris 'isn't entrenched enough to be worth much'.
xterm, for example, has had code to support Unix98/Solaris-style pty
allocation since at least 1995. I suspect the vast majority of portable
applications to be similar.
--Scott
@ @
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-oOO-(_)-OOo-=-=-=-=-=
C. Scott Ananian: cananian@lcs.mit.edu / Declare the Truth boldly and
Laboratory for Computer Science/Crypto / without hindrance.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology /META-PARRESIAS AKOLUTOS:Acts 28:31
-.-. .-.. .. ..-. ..-. --- .-. -.. ... -.-. --- - - .- -. .- -. .. .- -.
PGP key available via finger and from http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/~cananian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu