Bug 868685
| Summary: | xorg-x11-xinit: "Error getting tty num" | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Steve <ulatekh> | ||||
| Component: | xorg-x11-xinit | Assignee: | X/OpenGL Maintenance List <xgl-maint> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | 17 | CC: | rdieter, xgl-maint | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Patch | ||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | i686 | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2013-05-20 23:27:43 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Bug Depends On: | 806491 | ||||||
| Bug Blocks: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Steve
2012-10-21 18:06:36 UTC
Soooo...is anyone going to apply this fix? I just upgraded a computer from FC16 to FC17 and noticed that the old, bugged version was still in the yum repos. Created attachment 750754 [details]
Patch for FC18
Here's the patch for FC18.
So...is anyone ever going to apply this _extremely simple_ bug fix...?
Or am I just spamming the bug queue?
So, I think folks in #fedora-devel conclude unanimously the proposed fix here is incorrect.
The code:
tty_num=$(tty | grep -oE '[0-9]+$')
...
if [ x"$tty_num" != x ]; then
# Specify TTY number directly to avoid recognizing startx session as
# inactive: RHBZ#820675
serverargs=${serverargs}" vt"${tty_num}
else
echo "Error getting tty num"
exit 1
fi
The real problem is hitting the "Error getting tty num" case at all. We need to know why/how the 'tty' call is ending up empty for you.
Here's the key difference we just found: "(tty>blah.txt)&" works "(tty>blah.txt&)" doesn't That seems like an odd inconsistency in the way bash handles background processes. So, if anything, it's a bash issue, not an xorg-x11-xinit issue. I'll shut up now. :-) |