On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 02:32:03PM -0600, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> (Sorry for the ugly copy/paste here, grabbing from a web browser to
> email)
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:02:13PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > Finally, let me explain why I favour the termios solution. The
> biggest
> > (and most important) aspect is that it allows existing applications
> > such as minicom and gettys to work as expected - getting the correct
> > handshaking mode that they desire without having to change userspace.
>
> What about creating a "struct termiox".
> Yeah, it creates a new ioctl, but it is a pretty standard
> ioctl among Unix's.
>
> I know adding termiox calls has been brought up before in
> the past, and of course, nothing ever gets added...
That still requires getty's and minicom etc to be modified, and as
I point out in my follow up mail, not having getty understand it
can be a security issue.
Since we do have spare bits in cflag, I see no reason not to use
them. If we use these spare bits, we stand a good chance that we'll
have the desired behaviour without modifying userland.
I've seen the occasional alternative suggestion, but no one has yet
put forward a coherent argument against using termios's cflags to
control the handshake mode.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
