Rob Browning <r...@defaultvalue.org> writes: > Hmm, just to clarify. *I* didn't write any of that code, and hadn't > considered it carefully yet -- I just replicated the existing > scm_ttyname() code from posix.c, i.e. this just does what we already do > there.
Oh, and in addition to wondering about using ttyname_r when it's available, if we did that, or even if we didn't, I could also see moving the shared code to a shared helper, but I was just starting with a "simpler" proposal (to avoid the crash). Thanks -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4