Subject: Re: README: kernel pty struct allocation change
To: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jason R Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 09/11/2000 10:54:57
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 11:21:18AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> We really need to consider implementing SVR4's ptm(4) as a regular device.
> The historic BSD hunt-group pty convention, while simpler in kernel code, is
> just not scalable. If 512 ptys are allocated, that means an application
> will need to attempt to open(2) 513 device nodes before a success!
Native cloning devices for PTYs is sort of a pet project of mine, and I
would expect it to be in the next major release after 1.5...
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>