From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932211Ab3GVKoI (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:44:08 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com ([209.85.223.179]:48680 "EHLO mail-ie0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757174Ab3GVKoG (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:44:06 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51ED0BBF.7060502@nod.at> References: <1374258017-19606-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <51E988FF.9010201@nod.at> <51ED0BBF.7060502@nod.at> From: Ramkumar Ramachandra Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:13:25 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: change defconfig to stop spawning xterm To: Lennart Poettering Cc: Al Viro , LKML , Richard Weinberger Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Corrected Lennart's email ID] Richard Weinberger wrote: > CC'ing Lennart. > > Am 22.07.2013 11:45, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: >> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >>> [1]: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2013-July/012152.html >> >> ... and the patches were rejected. Lennart says that UML providing >> /dev/tty* is wrong, and that UML should call them /dev/hvc* (or >> something). Can we do something about the situation? Can we remove >> /dev/tty*, and provide /dev/hvc*? Will we be breaking existing users? >> >> Thanks. >> >> Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> UML shouldn't be penalized for not implementing some terminal emulation, >>> but it should be penalized for doing so under the label of "VT support", >>> which it simply is not providing. >>> >>> They can call their ttys any way they want. If the call them >>> /dev/tty[1..64] however, then they need to implement the VC >>> interfaces. All of them. > > Lennart, can you please explain us why /dev/tty[1..64] is forced to > have virtual console support? > > Thanks, > //richard