From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-144893-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8A62138798
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:05:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D495221C0B3;
Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:05:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-oa0-f45.google.com (mail-oa0-f45.google.com [209.85.219.45])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F8BA21C005
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:05:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id o6so3021985oag.18
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:05:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=RnlhmWVZJULu0rR7zUE3WQbNNjDWCjtve2p8kUPynxA=;
b=mFMT+PrhVbzyQh4K4cDjfS2lyoGG50BbX+ueo0FB4NC5tt+H0hDnVNqjOQef1541go
UKRX9FWwHKhFWr/Om6tkvg5J2JS9NPe7IJ338UzdBY5Pzf9gGHUAVJFaVkyafFmuKbyf
PoD/ztbahnPP56vJCQjfaapx3tDoACd6jpp+RWq+6wV/gGGamfyM4K/TCcXGzSoSllC0
hoQuXE87LAvhMdWEc5ikTavtMXB2o6XMimwIT5aFnZlhwrC+e+AAIhh4KVf+DD7iERTd
AUQtymLMm7B3rbMwDWKIIt0HKI3Je6dt+PFJhr2oAZO9XlMc/EVC+X9R67wQ708YxFfd
aymA==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.221.4 with SMTP id qa4mr6563582obc.100.1359641107351;
Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:05:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.20.243 with HTTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:05:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+czFiCfSPaJhbR1muxRWFsfeONs82NgLOgq0BiTVKbkfVvxPg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+czFiD0PYZ7tDr_zbq0gYeLPPp-MrTsjL4ahJL0yCr1h1bYfg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADPrc81tBErtN=Jd0A9zEROW3hhm3JJWMaHqBcSKPruOoDoW4g@mail.gmail.com>
<CADPrc81RFesdLg0uiGpGCxuZRbo9Du8=c7yaxyaSHe3T+T56Dw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+czFiBs2L_LjQedT=bM5ixWu8Sm6yC3DSPHtJ41UHzNooqw_w@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+czFiCfSPaJhbR1muxRWFsfeONs82NgLOgq0BiTVKbkfVvxPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:05:07 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+czFiDkUV+R9W66D6_MQp6=mYGmeWQ8BoTNE71c4PTLqX5W7g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev-191 bit me. Insufficient ptys
From: Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: c3fe439a-cfc6-40f2-90fc-5a29261752be
X-Archives-Hash: 40571d7ecfa605a222254f1e73d5831a
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s <caneko@=
gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s <caneko=
@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>>>>> So, I botched the upgrade to udev-191. I thought I'd followed the
>>>>> steps, but I apparently only covered them for one machine, not both.
>>>>>
>>>>> The news item instructions specified that I had to remove
>>>>> udev-postmount from my runlevels. I didn't have udev-postmount in my
>>>>> runlevels, so I didn't remove it. Turns out, that dictum also applies
>>>>> to udev-mount. So after removing that[1], I was able to at least boot
>>>>> again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Udev also complained about DEVTMPFS not being enabled in the
>>>>> kernel.[2] I couldn't get into X, but I could log in via getty and a
>>>>> plain old vt, so I enabled it, rebuilt the kernel, installed it and
>>>>> rebooted...and now that's presumably covered.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm now able to get into X, but when I try to run an xterm, it fails.
>>>>> Checking ~/.xsession_errors, I find:
>>>>>
>>>>> xterm: Error 32, error 2: No such file or directory
>>>>> Reason: get_pty: not enough ptys
>>>>
>>>> Do you have CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYS=3Dy? If so, do you really need it? A
>>>> little over a year ago[1] I had an annoying issue for having that
>>>> option enabled in my kernel, with a lot of virtual ttys reported in
>>>> systemctl. This is a shot in the dark (I really don't know if it's
>>>> related to your problem), but perhaps having the LEGACY_PTYS option
>>>> enabled somehow depleted your available pseudo terminals (which any X
>>>> terminal needs to run)? I suppose screen is also out of the question
>>>> for the same reason.
>>
>> No, I don't have CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYs. I do have UNIX98 PTYs, and I
>> tried enabling alternate namespaces, but that didn't help either.
>>
>>>
>>> Also related, if you have LEGACY_PTYS:
>>>
>>> "LEGACY_PTY_COUNT:
>>>
>>> The maximum number of legacy PTYs that can be used at any one time.
>>> The default is 256, and should be more than enough. Embedded
>>> systems may want to reduce this to save memory.
>>>
>>> When not in use, each legacy PTY occupies 12 bytes on 32-bit
>>> architectures and 24 bytes on 64-bit architectures."
>>
>> Yeah, I'm not using CONFIG_LEGACY_PTY, so LEGACY_PTY_COUNT doesn't
>> even make itself available in menuconfig.
>
> Hm. Some googling suggests this might be a permissions issue.
>
> I do have consolekit enabled, but I'm using gdm, so I'd expect that to
> take care of itself. (Although screen fails to launch from vt1, so
> it's not a consolekit problem.)
OK, it looks like /dev/pts is not mounted. But darned if I know
why...Isn't udev supposed to handle that?
--
:wq