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-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA4A21F990 for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 20:35:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6413385ED4B; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 20:35:04 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A6413385ED4B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1596659704; bh=3hDThiP5HOXJznAOT2WDk81uxii5NNy/GXowVJZnwFM=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=mbuuFcF6u2t0KbUzNmCIwLN+TsrUxrH2NLLafjcOZfRAgxDNNm3t2nTHUaWIDMSgM YsSxvPfFYmVHM5vpQaKlN8AFtp4MWkOdKTxEEMSJCytgVqQXB3KoV6S+yBrzLyY44V OuvUBqLw3nbKUkfTWZx9vudMBYFrGco9Rvf0SX5Q= Received: from mail-wr1-x444.google.com (mail-wr1-x444.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::444]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B1D9385ED4B for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 20:35:02 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 1B1D9385ED4B Received: by mail-wr1-x444.google.com with SMTP id a15so41902232wrh.10 for ; Wed, 05 Aug 2020 13:35:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:cc:subject:to:references:from :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3hDThiP5HOXJznAOT2WDk81uxii5NNy/GXowVJZnwFM=; b=OSppkpEvInyl1gxHA6Ogg8XT46w+7i+OIGfXZ2rY7nm1XElpdliLR612TylJJo4FZr LVLCg3GcUlJBuC74uDN0CXvO1nFOYLFaH6maHUUVxMVsN8wRRlz7T8HwvjhxP8wBmyG9 BEvBlY3tsE2KfTkrqyYDvF6RU1s8nyXjxr42vgLxqG8lVx1dKx9MxpK1rUCdtYCHMvHD z3Jz/Hp96F5PyE1CC1UR1TyN+Y2l0bExNaZThKT9lUzEPaVwrPZPIFZFywal2VY2Sk3a 3E742puhO8GGo7DqirZROikr0JzmsMbStSvb4ABofotUFJvzSrhdKTPaPenidBC6qwsA K37Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531jNNoQQ5MlONOdprxfp5xEzCy/jyMdsc4PPJRZ35RG0DZoFD+h Q+VljaRGmOhhO3Z8i8JHS+M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwbmEvfzYP9qybW1o/enK0h48lL6B13KmWqkPp0E+Znu7YTTwpjOKau9MOzFgwjWEgG6o79hg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:de08:: with SMTP id b8mr3997846wrm.4.1596659701240; Wed, 05 Aug 2020 13:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:a61:241a:1101:8c63:f991:aa91:da82? ([2001:a61:241a:1101:8c63:f991:aa91:da82]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t189sm4072947wmf.47.2020.08.05.13.35.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Aug 2020 13:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Pseudoterminal terminology in POSIX To: Paul Smith , Donn Terry , Geoff Clare References: <20200805135110.6Sj7F%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <20200805142049.GA17848@localhost> <1d8c5e6e96fbdd47ce143a566b57db2c803d4898.camel@gnu.org> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 22:34:59 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1d8c5e6e96fbdd47ce143a566b57db2c803d4898.camel@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: "Michael Kerrisk \(man-pages\) via Libc-alpha" Reply-To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com Cc: "Michael Kerrisk \(man-pages\)" , Florian Weimer , linux-man , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" , austin-group-l , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, enh , Joseph Myers Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" [again restoring the CC] On 8/5/20 5:28 PM, Paul Smith via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote: > On Wed, 2020-08-05 at 08:00 -0700, Donn Terry via austin-group-l at The > Open Group wrote: >> The suggestions here so far are cumbersome and tend to be ambiguous. >> The old m-word and sl-word, and also "client" and "server" could >> potentially be interpreted backwards from the conventional intent. >> (You can think about it as the sl-word/client actually being in >> control: telling the m-word/server what it's supposed to be doing, >> e.g. "execute this command line".) >> >> How about "provider" and "consumer"? "Pseudoterminal provider" and >> "...consumer" seem (at least to me) to be unambiguous in terms of the >> reversal above, (reasonably) clear in meaning, and politically >> neutral. Have the other discussions not shown here considered this? > > To me even "provider" / "consumer" still has this issue: do you > consider the pseudoterminal as providing to the terminal, or the > terminal as providing to the pseudoterminal. Both seem legitimate > enough interpretations to create confusion. That was my immediate thought also, unfortunately. That said, again, I think if we settle on a terminology (even provider/consumer), people will adapt. (But, i still prefer pseudoterminal/terminal or ancillary/primary). > To remove ambiguity perhaps we need to think about the attributes that > are unique to each element of the pair and use that in the term, for > example "backend" / "frontend". > > This would have to be introduced, something like "a pseudoterminal > device pair consists of a backend terminal device and a frontend > pseudoterminal device". Yes. The terminology, whatever it is, needs to be introduced and defined. That alone will remove a lot of ambiguity, regardless of the terms that are settled on. Thanks, Michael