From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 753D61F463 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:38:11 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=vZpKmmZu63/b6BylMozeGY8LlBiMxw TFuCKoyeftJLrhfr/I1oGdjZBvoZRDDmJXTbVrNVA1JHfVKiA+MqWnmqJFQQlamd laCp4mIMqXCVY3sLykpTsiaS3RLFMceUobHAAbtrHTyqMtIVknTP/inMFoSwC62g 4YMlLSRj9oIQ4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; s=default; bh=dVtJkQQa1UjVkAfngJlsRdmYV54=; b=CHDB ChMmHelkcGr55nGrdffzPb2QWmu6dJBmvOo6Dq7em5W1EWApmRZ9HaUA56x3iOgk jBj76duDZPoyTp1guiQv2cEsULW5BJsHu/x9Srux1dxUWNJvZAOaLN18ZR0/DTAJ broUpcZNf/F3nNjo3BmNL+vTl/zxw7ewIZDNK7g= Received: (qmail 98676 invoked by alias); 31 Dec 2019 16:38:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 98664 invoked by uid 89); 31 Dec 2019 16:38:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: hera.aquilenet.fr Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:38:03 +0100 From: Samuel Thibault To: Florian Weimer Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: posix_openpt vs getpt?? Message-ID: <20191231163803.rbcctlhvyhwdrxqv@function> References: <20191230213550.icqt2er7dwnxcrrb@function> <87a778mxta.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87a778mxta.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Hello, Florian Weimer, le mar. 31 déc. 2019 14:25:37 +0100, a ecrit: > > In sysdeps/unix/bsd/getpt.c we can read: > > > > /* We cannot define posix_openpt in general for BSD systems. */ > > > > I do not see why posix_openpt can't be defined like getpt is. Is there > > a semantic difference between them beyond the open flags that could be > > just passed to the open() call? Notably, Linux' getpt() is actually > > implemented as __posix_openpt (O_RDWR)... > > We don't have an in-tree BSD port, and the BSD at the time was > probably quite different from what we have today. I suggest to ignore > the comment and rearrange things in the way that make the most sense > for Linux and Hurd. Ok, thanks, I guess that'll to wait for 2.32, though. And best wishes for the new year! Samuel