Skip to contentSkip to conversation

/dev/pts question

DISCUSSION elko 2 participants 2 messages Apr 18, 2001

lore
Share & tools
lore

elko

author
#0 lore raw

hello,

as I understand, /dev/pts was created
to make an end to the overload in /dev/<devices> and let the kernel put the entries in /dev/pts when they are used/needed/installed.

but still, when I enable /dev/pts, I have to keep the /dev/<devices> for backward compatibility with already installed applications that rely on them.

would it be possible/sane to make like a /dev/* (some sort of a /dev/B-compatible) besides /dev/pts, where the kernel translates' the /dev/<device> request to /dev/* and then translate' that to the correct /dev/pts entry ??

at least, something like that...

Signature · 1 line
elko
#1 lore raw
Followup to:  <01041822354404.00617@ElkOS>
By author:    elko <[email protected]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
Quoted 6 lines

as I understand, /dev/pts was created
to make an end to the overload in /dev/<devices> and let the kernel put the entries in /dev/pts when they are used/needed/installed.

You understand wrong. /dev/pts was constructed because the semantics of BSD pty's is broken (there are issues with permissions.)

Quoted 3 lines

but still, when I enable /dev/pts, I have to keep the /dev/<devices> for backward compatibility with already installed applications that rely on them.

You should fix your applications.

Quoted 5 lines

would it be possible/sane to make like a /dev/* (some sort of a /dev/B-compatible) besides /dev/pts, where the kernel translates' the /dev/<device> request to /dev/* and then translate' that to the correct /dev/pts entry ??

Absolutely not. BSD and Unix98 ptys have different semantics, and absolutely, positively, must be kept separate -- or you have a security hole in your machine.

Fix your old applications.

-hpa

Signature · 3 lines
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt