Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!super.ece.jhu.edu!lawc
From: lawc@super.ece.jhu.edu (Chiu-Tai Law)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mips
Subject: Re: slattach misbehaviour?
Message-ID: <6087@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Date: 26 Jul 90 18:15:24 GMT
References: <1990Jul25.132828.1819@sobeco.com>
Sender: news@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Lines: 31
Nntp-Posting-Host: super.ece.jhu.edu

In article <1990Jul25.132828.1819@sobeco.com> lamy@sobeco.com (Jean-Francois Lamy) writes:
>After starting slattach from sh, csh or ksh on a RC3230 or an M/120 running
>4.50, one sees the following (mis)behaviour:
>
>- "tty" run on the shell reports the tty on which the login took place, as it
>  should.
>- ps, however, reports that no terminal is associated with the shell or any
>  process started under it.

  It sounds like it is the same problem that I experienced when I tried to
compile the xterm program in X11R3 and X11R4 under bsd environment.  I have
discovered this a long while ago but do not time to write a program to
demonstrate that there are some strange characteristics in the bsd
tty driver and report to mips.  It seems to me that the description in
TTY(4-BSD) -- if a process which has no control terminal opens a terminal
file, then that terminal file becomes the control terminal for that process --
does not hold.  If I define USE_SYSV_TERMIO in the compiling xterm, the
problem of missing control tty is got.  Are you compiling under bsd
environment?

>- attempts to fire up programs that expect a controlling terminal (e.g. "su")
>  will fail ("su" will actually give a Memory Fault, what fun, when it can't
>  open /dev/tty -- ought to check return values of open, neh?)

add script to the list.A

By the way, our system (M/120) still runs 4.01.  When will the upgrade
4.50 come?
-- 
Chiu Tai Law				lawc@super.ece.jhu.edu
(301) 338-7976				lawc@alpha.ece.jhu.edu