[BusyBox] Re: any reason why telnetd rejects and vanishes?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Rob Landley wrote:

> On Tuesday 12 April 2005 06:15 am, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Vijay Padiyar wrote:
>
> > i'll give this a test shortly but let me emphasize a point one
> > more time -- telnetd used to work fine under the same version of
> > busybox on the same system.  the only thing that's changed is the
> > kernel -- the boot-time scripts are the same, the /dev directory
> > is (apparently) the same, and so on.
>
> Wild guess: your old kernel had support for legacy bsd-style pty
> devices compiled in, and the new one only has the unix98 ones.  So
> if the code tries to fall back to BSD style pty, it would work on
> your old kernel but not on your new one?

actually, it's the other way around.  the old kernel is a variant of
2.4.22 and there is no config option for legacy bsd-style pty devices
(given that, back then, those weren't considered legacy).

the new 2.6.11 kernel has *both* unix98 and bsd legacy ptys selected.
go figure.  so i'm still confused, albeit in a much more enlightened
way. :-)

rday

p.s.  incorporating the previous suggestion of just adding

 #include <config.h>

to telnetd.c did fix the problem, but it would still be nice to know
what weird behaviour i was seeing before.  oh, well.