* getpt, openpty: Opening an unused pty, which can't be our ctty
* shm_open, sem_open: These don't work with ttys
* opendir: Directories are unlikely to be ttys
Signed-off-by: Sergey Bugaev
---
catgets/open_catalog.c | 4 ++--
elf/dl-load.c | 2 +-
elf/dl-misc.c
This internal definition makes it possible to use O_IGNORE_CTTY in
the glibc codebase unconditionally, no matter whether the current port
provides it or not (i.e. both on Hurd and on Linux). Along with the
definition, this adds a small guide on when O_IGNORE_CTTY is to be used.
The following commi
Hello,
this is the v3 of the "O_IGNORE_CTTY everywhere" patchset. Please see
the v1 cover letter [0] for an explanation of what O_IGNORE_CTTY is and
does.
[0]: https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-April/147355.html
Changes since v2:
1. Dropped the already commited patches.
2. Dropp
This both works around ordering issues, and removes an x86-specific file
from the list.
Suggested-by: Joseph Myers
Signed-off-by: Sergey Bugaev
---
We could maybe clean this up even further, but -- diminishing returns :|
sysdeps/mach/hurd/bits/errno.h | 4
sysdeps/mach/hurd/errnos.awk |
Sergey Bugaev, le dim. 04 juin 2023 20:40:54 +0300, a ecrit:
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 8:21 PM Samuel Thibault
> wrote:
> > It seems so indeed. But it's not only the stack guard, but various TLS
> > accesses.
>
> What would be an easy way for me to reproduce this?
Basically all I'm trying to do
On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 8:21 PM Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It seems so indeed. But it's not only the stack guard, but various TLS
> accesses.
What would be an easy way for me to reproduce this?
Sergey
Hello,
Sergey Bugaev, le sam. 03 juin 2023 20:20:24 +0300, a ecrit:
> I'm attaching a patch that does that and also documents the pitfalls
> (and also removes an extra block scope / level of indentation). It's
> untested, but it builds and the generated code looks OK (sc_reply_port
> gets loaded s
