run_erl problem on RedHat ES 4

[Ernie Makris]

This is what I use. Can the otp team include this in the next release? 
Fedora run_erl is broken out of the box.
Jouni Rynö originally sent a patch to me and I added a fix to it in order to 
close the fds properly
as it wasn't working on redhat or fedora.

Here it is:
+++ run_erl.c   2005-10-07 15:19:00.000000000 -0400
@@ -45,6 +45,8 @@
 #if !defined(NO_SYSLOG)
 #include <syslog.h>
 #endif
+#include <pty.h>
+#include <utmp.h>

 #if defined(O_NONBLOCK)
 # define DONT_BLOCK_PLEASE O_NONBLOCK
@@ -803,6 +805,7 @@
 static int open_pty_master(char **ptyslave)
 {
   int mfd;
+  int sfd;
   char *major, *minor;

   static char majorchars[] = "pqrstuvwxyzabcdePQRSTUVWXYZABCDE";
@@ -818,6 +821,15 @@
   /* http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu/~ali/K0D/UNIX/PTY/code/upty.h.html */

   {
+    static char ttyname[] = "                                   ";
+    if (0 == openpty(&mfd, &sfd, ttyname, NULL, NULL)) {
+      close(sfd);
+      *ptyslave = ttyname;
+      return mfd;
+    }
+  }
+
+  {
     /* New style devpts or devfs /dev/pty/{m,s}{0,1....} */

     static char ptyname[] = "/dev/pty/mX";

You also have to modify the Makefile to add -lutil for the compilation of 
run_erl.

Thanks
Ernie


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Serge Aleynikov" <serge@REDACTED>
To: "Erlang Questions" <erlang-questions@REDACTED>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 2:29 PM
Subject: run_erl problem on RedHat ES 4


> OTP Team:
>
> We ran accross the following issue with run_erl:
>
> ~>cat /etc/redhat-release
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 4 (Nahant)
> ~>cat /proc/version
> Linux version 2.6.9-5.ELsmp (bhcompile@REDACTED) (gcc 
> version 3.4.3 20041212 (Red Hat 3.4.3-9.EL4)) #1 SMP Wed Jan 5 19:30:39 
> EST 2005
>
> >erts-5.4.9/bin/run_erl var/tmp/test var/log/test "ls"
> run_erl [17489] Wed Oct 12 14:25:11 2005
> Could not open pty master
>
> Apparently this version of Linux doesn't have any /dev/pty devices 
> installed:
>
> >ls -l /dev/p*
> lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root      3 Aug 29 17:05 /dev/par0 -> lp0
> crw-rw----  1 root lp    99, 0 Aug 29 13:04 /dev/parport0
> crw-rw----  1 root lp    99, 1 Aug 29 13:04 /dev/parport1
> crw-rw----  1 root lp    99, 2 Aug 29 13:04 /dev/parport2
> crw-rw----  1 root lp    99, 3 Aug 29 13:04 /dev/parport3
> crw-r-----  1 root kmem   1, 4 Aug 29 13:03 /dev/port
> crw-------  1 root root 108, 0 Aug 29 13:04 /dev/ppp
> crw-rw-rw-  1 root tty    5, 2 Oct 12 14:26 /dev/ptmx
>
> /dev/pts:
> total 0
> crw--w----  1 dkorsun tty 136, 0 Sep 20 18:02 0
> crw--w----  1 dkorsun tty 136, 1 Oct 12 10:38 1
> crw--w----  1 serge   tty 136, 2 Oct 12 14:26 2
>
> Is this an oversight in run_erl, or you could recommend a work-around?
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- 
> Serge Aleynikov
> R&D Telecom, IDT Corp.
> Tel: (973) 438-3436
> Fax: (973) 438-1464
> serge@REDACTED