I like these changes -- I think I mentioned that approach earlier when adding the pty module, but before we had replacement functions for forkpty/openpty in progress, the separation is kind of unnecessary. Let's hope we'll have replacement functions soon after this. Feel free to push your changes.
>> I don't understand two things here: >> - Why does 'forkpty' depend on 'openpty'? > > I guess it doesn't have to. It's just that for now, test-forkpty.c > tests both interfaces. It may be cleanest to split the test modules too, so there is one test-forkpty.c and test-openpty.c. >> - Since forkpty.m4 is used for both 'forkpty' and 'openpty', it is >> asymetric >> and a bit misleading to call it 'forkpty.m4'. Why not call it 'pty.m4'? > > Sure; I named it forkpty.m4 to avoid confusion with the fact that I just > renamed pty.m4 -> pty_h.m4 in the previous patch. But pty.m4 for both > forkpty and openpty makes sense. I'll post a respin of the patches, > incorporating your comments, and restart the review clock. Thanks, Simon
