Subject: FVWM: FvwmButtons problem, more...

From: Jason Lingohr <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 15:13:08 +1000 (EST)

Just did a truss on both the running fvwm process clicking on an xterm 
button, and trussing an xterm from a commandline.  Got this from the 
commandline truss:

19541:  getuid()                                        = 347 [347]
19541:  getgid()                                        = 20 [20]
19541:  sigaction(SIGTTOU, 0xEFFFEBD0, 0xEFFFECD0)      = 0
19541:  sigaction(SIGALRM, 0xEFFFEBD0, 0xEFFFECD0)      = 0
19541:  alarm(2)                                        = 0
19541:  open("/dev/tty", O_RDWR)                        = 6
19541:  alarm(0)                                        = 2
19541:  sigaction(SIGALRM, 0xEFFFEBD0, 0xEFFFECD0)      = 0
19541:  ioctl(6, TCGETS, 0xEFFFF63C)                    = 0
19541:  close(6)                                        = 0

And this from the fvwm process:

18678:  getuid()                                        = 347 [347]
18678:  getgid()                                        = 20 [20]
18678:  sigaction(SIGTTOU, 0xEFFFF0A0, 0xEFFFF1A0)      = 0
18678:  sigaction(SIGALRM, 0xEFFFF0A0, 0xEFFFF1A0)      = 0
18678:  alarm(2)                                        = 0
18678:  open("/dev/tty", O_RDWR)                        Err#22 EINVAL
18678:  alarm(0)                                        = 2
18678:  sigaction(SIGALRM, 0xEFFFF0A0, 0xEFFFF1A0)      = 0
18678:  write(2, " x t e r m", 5)                       = 5
18678:  write(2, " :   E r r o r  ", 8)                 = 8
18678:  write(2, " 1 4", 2)                             = 2
18678:  write(2, " ,   e r r n o  ", 8)                 = 8
18678:  write(2, " 2 2 :  ", 4)                         = 4
18678:  write(2, " I n v a l i d   a r g u".., 16)      = 16
18678:  write(2, "\n", 1)                               = 1
18678:  sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, 0xEFFFF0E8, 0xEFFFF0D8)  = 0

As it shows, the already-exec'ed xterm process is trying to get to 
/dev/tty, and failing with an EINVAL.  The weirdest thing is that 
according to the open(2) man page, EINVAL shouldn't even be a returned 
error value upon a call to open().

Does this give anyone a better idea?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Lingohr                            Frankston Monash Yoyo Administration
[email-masked]                       B.Comp(Inf. Sys.) student
http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~lingman             Internet Systems Consultant
Mobile: +61-(0)411-46-9939         IT Consultant with Cybersource Pty Limited 
            IT Journalist -- LAN Magazine Australia/New Zealand
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].