lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 19:45:23 +0100
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc:	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ivan <athlon_@...l.ru>
Subject: Re: man termios

Just double checked things....

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com> wrote:

[...]

>>> and
>>>
>>>    ./noncanonical 0 5 3 2
>>>     hel
>>
>>
>> Solaris
>> read blocks()
>> OpenBSD
>> read blocks
>
>
> If you type fast, Linux will complete this read() with 3 bytes.

Sorry -- I got this one wrong. I was not typing fast enough, Solaris
and OpenBSD are the same as Linux.

[...]

>>> on other platforms.
>>>
>>> With respect to POSIX compliance, it's hard to say. I'm not sure the
>>> spec contemplates the degenerate case where max bytes < MIN. And
>>
>>
>> Well, given the way the other implementations behave, I think it does
>> contemplate it, because it carefull avoids talking about the number of
>> bytes requested by read() in that case.
>
>
> I agree that's certainly a valid interpretation.
> I'll go back and see if this is a regression but I doubt it.

I doubt it too. I suspect it's been like that forever, but it's a
corner case that no-one cares about.

>>> specifically
>>> with regard to terminal i/o behavior, POSIX is essentially ex post facto,
>>> and is really documenting existing behavior.
>>>
>>> Other than the degenerate case of max bytes < MIN, is there any other
>>> variation between Solaris and Linux in non-canonical mode?
>>
>>
>> The only one I've seen is the one I noted. I haven't tested too
>> exhaustively though.
>
>
> Thanks again. Please feel free to direct mail my way if you find other
> variation.

Okay.

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists