IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
This reverts commit c8c03f1858.
It turns out that while fixing the ptmx file descriptor to have the
correct 'struct path' to the associated slave pty is a really good
thing, it breaks some user space tools for a very annoying reason.
The problem is that /dev/ptmx and its associated slave pty (/dev/pts/X)
are on different mounts. That was what caused us to have the wrong path
in the first place (we would mix up the vfsmount of the 'ptmx' node,
with the dentry of the pty slave node), but it also means that now while
we use the right vfsmount, having the pty master open also keeps the pts
mount busy.
And it turn sout that that makes 'pbuilder' very unhappy, as noted by
Stefan Lippers-Hollmann:
"This patch introduces a regression for me when using pbuilder
0.228.7[2] (a helper to build Debian packages in a chroot and to
create and update its chroots) when trying to umount /dev/ptmx (inside
the chroot) on Debian/ unstable (full log and pbuilder configuration
file[3] attached).
[...]
Setting up build-essential (12.3) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.24-15) ...
I: unmounting dev/ptmx filesystem
W: Could not unmount dev/ptmx: umount: /var/cache/pbuilder/build/1340/dev/ptmx: target is busy
(In some cases useful info about processes that
use the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1).)"
apparently pbuilder tries to unmount the /dev/pts filesystem while still
holding at least one master node open, which is arguably not very nice,
but we don't break user space even when fixing other bugs.
So this commit has to be reverted.
I'll try to figure out a way to avoid caching the path to the slave pty
in the master pty. The only thing that actually wants that slave pty
path is the "TIOCGPTPEER" ioctl, and I think we could just recreate the
path at that time.
Reported-by: Stefan Lippers-Hollmann <s.l-h@gmx.de>
Cc: Eric W Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@canonical.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
143c97cc65