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  linux-cve-announce  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, 12 Apr 2019 13:12:05 +0000
From:   "Adamski, Krzysztof (Nokia - PL/Wroclaw)" 
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <>
CC:     Vincent Whitchurch <>,
        Greg KH <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: Add NULL TTY driver

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 01:40:56PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
>On 12.04.19 09:30, Adamski, Krzysztof (Nokia - PL/Wroclaw) wrote:
>> Well, that depends. If the program doing those writes expects /dev/console
>> to be a tty device, then it cannot be any file.
>According to Vincent's mail, the actual problem is just systemd.
>Changing the kernel just for making one specific userland program
>(which happens to be written by somebody, who even doesn't know the
>semantics of rm -R) happy, sounds pretty strange for me.
>I'm not opposed to the general idea of having a dummy tty driver,
>but please for some actually sane usecases, not just working around
>broken userland :p

I don't want to start a flame but if that userspace would be written by
somebody else, would that change anything? :) Anyways, historically we
did not have many convinence usitlities in the kernel and now we do. So
does the fact that "this might be convinient but is not strictly
necessary" a blocker to get something into the kernel?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists