Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ssbn!texbell!egsner!spdyne!root From: root@spdyne.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport Subject: Re: Setkey problem... Message-ID: <1700007@spdyne> Date: 4 Jan 89 21:08:00 GMT References: <1700002@spdyne> Lines: 56 Nf-ID: #R:spdyne:1700002:spdyne:1700007:004:2996 Nf-From: spdyne.UUCP!root Jan 4 15:08:00 1989 >I wrote: >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> I have sent this 8 ways to try to get it into uport... INCLUDING >> directly connecting to uport! No response... > >My guess is that are in fact not reaching a read account. Are you using the >"techs" account or are you going direct? Microport does reply to mail or >else they would see a lot more of this type of flame. (Which was quite common >not all that long ago.) > Well, I sent it to the following accounts: techs, plocher, jmsully. all at uport, with no luck.. (this was a couple of months ago, and I was giving them time to respond, not knowing how overloaded their time may be...) Refering to the original question: (Setkey) > >I feel (as apparently so does Microport) that an ioctl to one console device >should not affect ALL console devices. (Just as NDELAY on ttys should affect >only the tty set with NDELAY and not all ttys or even all fds open to that tty.) > >This behavior (albeit not exactly what you had in mind) is correct and should >stay the way it is. (How difficult is it to simulate using what is correct >behavior to make things be the way you want? My guess is a three line shell >script.) > >Good luck. > David F. Carlson, Micropen, Inc. Did I miss something here? You say that executing login on a DIFFERENT console terminal SHOULD Zap all of the setkey assignments on the console and every other /dev/cons*?!!? And the back it up with some something about ONLY affecting the ONE console device that it was executed on?? I don't understand. Did you understand my original question? I think that it should work AS DOCUMENTED: if executed on the console it will affect all consoles, if executed on a virt. console, it will affect ONLY that console. After some more checking, I found that if you execute setkey -d on any console, it will clear all of them. It seems that the other bug that I had, namely that reassigning a key that was once assigned causing it to scramble all of the assignments, no longer is a problem. (Now that I have upgraded to 3.0E. To fix the problem with it scrambling the assignments, I had a setkey -d in my .login (Before all of the other setkey's, I have fixed this by only executing setkey on the console.. but.. it still is broken.) -Chert Pellett