On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Juergen Hannken-Illjes wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/fs/ptyfs: ptyfs.h ptyfs_subr.c ptyfs_vfsops.c ptyfs_vnops.c
Log Message:
- Add a map of active controlling ptys per mount and no longer abuse
the vnode lifecycle.
- No longer set "recycle" on VOP_INACTIVE().
- Ma
In article <20121024204834.ga11...@netbsd.org>,
David Holland wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 07:31:01PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> > Module Name:src
> > Committed By: christos
> > Date: Tue Oct 23 23:31:01 UTC 2012
> >
> > Modified Files:
> > src/sys/fs/ptyf
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 07:31:01PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By:christos
> Date:Tue Oct 23 23:31:01 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/fs/ptyfs: ptyfs_subr.c
>
> Log Message:
> fix the mystery of the bad directory times.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 05:14:53AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> however, if the change mean to make ptyfs know the particular setup of
> null mount over it, it sounds like an unacceptable hack to me.
It is the least intrusive way to get the result without hacking the
whole pts subsystem to all
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 03:00:35AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>> > Case 1: You have /dev/pts mounted outside the chroot and want to use
>> > e.g. sshd inside the chroot.
>>
>> in this case, there is no "correct" pathname anyway, right?
>> i think it's more appropriate to return an error so t
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 03:00:35AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > Case 1: You have /dev/pts mounted outside the chroot and want to use
> > e.g. sshd inside the chroot.
>
> in this case, there is no "correct" pathname anyway, right?
> i think it's more appropriate to return an error so that an
hi,
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 01:34:16AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>> probably i'm missing something obvious.
>> i don't understand why you need to have two different behaviours.
>> the chroot one can't work for the non-chroot case?
>
> Case 1: You have /dev/pts mounted outside the chroot an
On Mar 23, 2:57am, jo...@britannica.bec.de (Joerg Sonnenberger) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/fs/ptyfs
| On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 01:34:16AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
| > probably i'm missing something obvious.
| > i don't understand why you need to have two diff
On Mar 23, 1:34am, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/fs/ptyfs
| > How else you could select either behavior?
|
| probably i'm missing something obvious.
| i don't understand why you need to have two different behaviours.
| the chr
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 01:34:16AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> probably i'm missing something obvious.
> i don't understand why you need to have two different behaviours.
> the chroot one can't work for the non-chroot case?
Case 1: You have /dev/pts mounted outside the chroot and want to use
> On Mar 23, 12:52am, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/fs/ptyfs
>
> | hi,
> |
> | > Module Name: src
> | > Committed By: christos
> | > Date: Sun Mar 15 16:43:55 UTC 2009
> | >
&
On Mar 23, 12:52am, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/fs/ptyfs
| hi,
|
| > Module Name:src
| > Committed By: christos
| > Date: Sun Mar 15 16:43:55 UTC 2009
| >
| > Modified Files:
| > src/sys
hi,
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Sun Mar 15 16:43:55 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/fs/ptyfs: ptyfs.h ptyfs_vfsops.c
>
> Log Message:
> Add a chroot flag, so that ptyfs can be mounted in a chrooted environment.
> XXX: This is a hack, in reality we sh
13 matches
Mail list logo
