From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22282 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2001 16:40:42 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 30 Sep 2001 16:40:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 24067 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2001 16:40:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 15914 Received: (qmail 24055 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2001 16:40:36 -0000 From: Borsenkow Andrej To: Bart Schaefer Cc: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk, lordzork@lordzork.com Message-ID: <3BB74AF3.8000600@mow.siemens.ru> Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 20:40:19 +0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20010914 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: error on TTY read: no such file or directory References: <3BB63D16.5040709@mow.siemens.ru> <20010929173848.H16561@hithaeglir.net> <3BB64378.8060505@mow.siemens.ru> <20010929181100.I16561@hithaeglir.net> <1010929223918.ZM20169@candle.brasslantern.com> <20010929202423.K16561@hithaeglir.net> <1010930012412.ZM20346@candle.brasslantern.com> <20010929213405.L16561@hithaeglir.net> <3BB6BAD4.5080201@mow.siemens.ru> <20010930074816.N16561@hithaeglir.net> <20010930133842.C2654@fysh.org> <1010930162212.ZM21385@candle.brasslantern.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Sep 30, 1:38pm, Zefram wrote: > } Subject: Re: error on TTY read: no such file or directory > } > } lordzork@lordzork.com wrote: > } >i made a new strace, this time without zsh reading any of its start up > } >files. my idea was that this would make it easier to read, but the new > } >strace looks completely different from the old one, at least to me. > } > } It's still doing the same impossible thing. > > I never saw the previous trace. Looking at this one, I note that it's > doing this impossible thing a lot, but only on fd 10, and sometimes zsh > just ignores the problem and loops. (That would happen when errno == 0, > or if the impossible occurred somewhere other than in getkey().) > In first strace I got it does it exactly once and then bails out. Not that it helps much. > Ignoring the problem would mean that zsh discarded at least one char of > input if there really were any, but there's no evidence of input being > lost. That in turn makes me think that reads from the tty are behaving > as if they're non-blocking, but for some reason are returning 1025 when > they should be returning -1 with EWOULDBLOCK. > I very much like to see what happens with "standard" mingetty instead of agetty. There is always a small chance it sets tty into some weird mode. -andrej