Re: the GPG_TTY line in bashrc produces error message in chroot environment
"Xi Ruoyao" ([email protected] via blfs-dev Mailing List) <[email protected]> Sun, 19 Oct 2025 23:02:32 +0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, 2025-10-19 at 16:39 +0800, Zhang Wen wrote: > Xi Ruoyao <[email protected]> 于2025年10月18日周六 19:00写道: > > > > On Sat, 2025-10-18 at 12:17 +0800, Zhang Wen wrote: > > > The root cause is while the tty command returns non-zero in the chroot > > > environment, the 'tty -s' command returns a zero value. > > > I changed 'tty -s' to 'tty > /dev/null 2>&1' and the error message > > > disappeared, not sure if there's a better solution. > > > > I'd say it's a coreutils bug and it should be reported to the coreutils > > developers. "tty -s" should have the same exit status as "tty". > > > > -- > > Xi Ruoyao <[email protected]> > > -- > > http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/blfs-dev > > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > > It's not necessarily the truth, there's a code structure overview link > below the the git line on https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils: > https://www.maizure.org/projects/decoded-gnu-coreutils/tty.html > It says that the silent mode of tty only return result of the isatty > function in the c library, while the normal mode return result of the > ttyname one. It's not relevant. The info page says: ‘-s’ ‘--silent’ ‘--quiet’ Print nothing; only return an exit status. Exit status: 0 if standard input is a terminal 1 if standard input is a non-terminal file 2 if given incorrect arguments 3 if a write error occurs 4 if the terminal's name cannot be determined It's not related to how the code is structured. It's simply the code isn't doing what the document says. If this wasn't a bug, it would mean "the terminal's name can be determined with -s, but it cannot without - s." That would be just ridiculous. Either the code should be fixed to ensure the exit status consistent with and without -s, or the documentation should be updated to document the current behavior. In either case we've encountered a bug here. -- Xi Ruoyao <[email protected]> -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/blfs-dev Unsubscribe: See the above information page