Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!shamash!hewey!ian From: ian@dms.cdc.com (Ian Hogg) Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp Subject: Re: TIOCNOTTY on HP9000/300 series? Keywords: Portability Where is it Message-ID: <611@hewey.dms.cdc.com> Date: 20 Nov 90 16:43:55 GMT References: <1990Nov14.210528.24883@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> Sender: news@dms.cdc.com Reply-To: ian@dms.cdc.com (Ian Hogg) Organization: Control Data Corp, Plymouth, MN Lines: 20 Nntp-Posting-Host: louie.dms.cdc.com Originator: ian@louie.dms.cdc.com In article <1990Nov14.210528.24883@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>, hurf@theory.tn.cornell.edu (Hurf Sheldon) writes: |> |> I am compiling some code from a bsd system that calls |> for TIOCNOTTY to be defined but I find in |> it is defined only if you have a 9000/800 series. |> Why is that? I don't know why it's only on the 800's but I call setsid() instead of the ioctl with TIOCNOTTY. I haven't noticed any problems. Is this the "best" replacement for TIOCNOTTY on the 300's? -- =============================================================================== Ian Hogg email: ian@dms.cdc.com Control Data Corporation phone: (612)-553-4484 -- =============================================================================== Ian Hogg email: ian@dms.cdc.com Control Data Corporation phone: (612)-553-4484