Hello,
in my opinion this is caused this way:
- synaptic calls vte_terminal_forkpty which calls __vte_pty_fork
- Now we have a parent process which gets in the variable pid the pid of
the child process. A call to vte_terminal_watch_child is needed and
gives no warning.
- But also we have now the child process, which has in variable pid a 0 (man
fork(2)).
In the child process we call now vte_terminal_watch_child with pid=0
and get therefore the warning.
Therefore I think:
- problem lies in package libvte-2.90-9
- with attached patch the warning could be avoided.
Kind regards,
Bernhard
pid_t
vte_terminal_forkpty(VteTerminal *terminal,
char **envv, const char *working_directory,
gboolean lastlog, gboolean utmp, gboolean wtmp)
{
#ifdef HAVE_FORK
VtePty *pty;
GPid pid;
g_return_val_if_fail(VTE_IS_TERMINAL(terminal), -1);
pty = vte_pty_new(__vte_pty_get_pty_flags(lastlog, utmp, wtmp), NULL);
if (pty == NULL)
return FALSE;
if (!__vte_pty_fork(pty,
&pid,
NULL)) {
g_object_unref(pty);
return FALSE;
}
vte_terminal_set_pty_object(terminal, pty);
// FIXMEchpe is that really right?
vte_terminal_watch_child(terminal, pid);
return pid;
#else
return -1;
#endif
}
Description: Avoid call to vte_terminal_watch_child in child process
Author: Bernhard Ãbelacker <bernha...@vr-web.de>
Bug-Debian: https://bugs.debian.org/743995
Bug-Ubuntu: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1282542
Last-Update: <2014-11-17>
--- vte3-0.36.3.orig/src/vte.c
+++ vte3-0.36.3/src/vte.c
@@ -4020,7 +4020,8 @@ vte_terminal_forkpty(VteTerminal *termin
vte_terminal_set_pty_object(terminal, pty);
// FIXMEchpe is that really right?
- vte_terminal_watch_child(terminal, pid);
+ if (pid > 0) /* call this only in parent process, in child process pid==0 */
+ vte_terminal_watch_child(terminal, pid);
return pid;
#else
