From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754832Ab0KRC3j (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:29:39 -0500 Received: from tango.0pointer.de ([85.214.72.216]:54728 "EHLO tango.0pointer.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753459Ab0KRC3i (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:29:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 03:29:17 +0100 From: Lennart Poettering To: Greg KH Cc: Alan Cox , Kay Sievers , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, linux-kernel , Werner Fink , Jiri Slaby Subject: Re: tty: add 'active' sysfs attribute to tty0 and console device Message-ID: <20101118022917.GA10114@tango.0pointer.de> References: <20101116195538.7fa66b97@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20101116213622.GA17824@tango.0pointer.de> <20101116225619.5fa7ef8b@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20101116231023.GB27594@tango.0pointer.de> <25482.1290031268@localhost> <20101117235647.00766e32@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20101118012734.GA8558@kroah.com> <20101118014848.GA7873@tango.0pointer.de> <20101118015310.GA30480@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101118015310.GA30480@kroah.com> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Campaign-1: () ASCII Ribbon Campaign X-Campaign-2: / Against HTML Email & vCards - Against Microsoft Attachments User-Agent: Leviathan/19.8.0 [zh] (Cray 3; I; Solaris 4.711; Console) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 17.11.10 17:53, Greg KH (greg@kroah.com) wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:48:48AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Wed, 17.11.10 17:27, Greg KH (greg@kroah.com) wrote: > > > > > I can do any one, or multiple things from the following options: > > > > > > - disable the existing ioctl to return an error so that no new > > > userspace program starts to use it thinking it is valid > > > - accept Werner's patch for those who like proc files > > > - accept Kay's patch > > > > > > Any suggestions? > > > > Maybe this is not so surprising, but I definitely want item #3 from the > > list. > > > > I am against #2, since #1 is a much nicer solution, and having both > > would be needlessly redundant. > > I think you mean s/1/3/ here, right? Yes, of course. Sorry for the confusion. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.