joe@haddock.ima.isc.com (Joe Chapman) (09/30/88)
stanonik@nprdc.arpa (Ron Stanonik) writes: > We're running 4.3bsd on a vax 780. Recently we had a panic: ttyrub. > The tty was a pseudo tty and the panicky application was telnetd. > The user on that tty was dbx'ing a seeminly innocuous application. The culprit appears to be a missing case statement in ttyrub(); we've been running with this fix: *** tty.c~ Thu Jun 5 03:09:35 1986 --- tty.c Wed Jun 15 10:39:29 1988 *************** *** 1506,1511 **** --- 1506,1512 ---- case BACKSPACE: case CONTROL: case RETURN: + case NEWLINE: if (tp->t_flags&CTLECH) ttyrubo(tp, 2); break; -- Joe Chapman Interactive Systems Boston joe@haddock.ima.isc.com
stanonik@nprdc.arpa (Ron Stanonik) (10/05/88)
I thought about adding NEWLINE to the case in ttyrub(), but is that a good idea? In this case, a NEWLINE got through the cooked mode processing. That shouldn't happen, so something is wrong. Failing to understand how that happened, the next question is, is it worth panic'ing? That is, if ignored (by adding it to the case) can something worse happen. Thanks, Ron stanonik@nprdc.arpa Ron Stanonik stanonik@nprdc.arpa ucsd!nprdc!stanonik