Re: Problem with ioctl command TCGETS

[Tomas Carnecky <tom@dbservice.com>]

Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 02:07:04PM +0100, Tomas Carnecky wrote:
> 
>>>Think read(2)/write(2).  We already have several barfbags too many,
>>>and that includes both ioctl() and setsockopt().  We are stuck with
>>>them for compatibility reasons, but why the hell would we need yet
>>>another one?
>>
>>And what's the option? So without ioctl, how would you reaplace this:
>>ioctl(cdrom_fd, CDROMEJECT, 0)?
> 
> Which part of "we are stuck with them" is not clear enough?  If you insist
> on using the same descriptor for data and for out-of-band mess - no, you
> can't get anything saner.  If you do not, you can; it's that simple...

Ok, I know ioctl is bad, but please tell me how to replace them, that's
all I want to know. Did you propose any other mechanism which could
replace ioctl? Or do you think such things (eject the cdrom) are not
meant to be done from applications?
I certainly don't insist on using them, but I don't see (yet) any way
how to replace them. Please enlighten me.

tom