HEADS UP: pts code committed
rwatson at FreeBSD.org
Sat Jan 28 13:51:00 PST 2006
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Stephen McKay wrote:
> On Thursday, 26th January 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Olivier Houchard wrote:
>>> Robert Watson and myself have been working on a pts implementation, ala
>>> SysV/linux, for quite some time...
> This is a long overdue feature, so well done!
> However there's something that looks a bit odd to me, and since I don't have
> -current set up at the moment, I can't check directly, so I'll ask here: Is
> it true that the naming scheme uses /dev/pts/999 and /dev/pty999, not
> /dev/pty/999? If so, that looks like a mistake. Is there something
> stopping the cleaner naming being used?
> If I've just read the code wrong, then I apologise and will immediately
> clear bench space for a -current test box!
You are right, that is what it does. This is actually an intentional design
choice to match the behavior in Solaris, which also names them /dev/ptyp*.
Well, strictly speaking, those are just symlinks into /devices, but it comes
to much the same thing. You are probably right, though -- naming them
/dev/pty/* would make more sense, and won't affect the libc API.
Robert N M Watson
More information about the freebsd-current