Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752281Ab3GWFrJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 01:47:09 -0400 Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com ([209.85.220.177]:54060 "EHLO mail-vc0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751083Ab3GWFrI (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 01:47:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51EE1765.2000402@nod.at> References: <1374258017-19606-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <51E988FF.9010201@nod.at> <51ED0BBF.7060502@nod.at> <20130722223238.GC13191@tango.0pointer.de> <51EE1765.2000402@nod.at> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 07:47:07 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: change defconfig to stop spawning xterm From: richard -rw- weinberger To: Richard Weinberger Cc: Lennart Poettering , Ramkumar Ramachandra , LKML , Al Viro Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2673 Lines: 70 Adding Al again, someone dropped him from the CC list... On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Lennart, > > Am 23.07.2013 00:32, schrieb Lennart Poettering: >> On Mon, 22.07.13 16:13, Ramkumar Ramachandra (artagnon@gmail.com) wrote: >> >>> >>> [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? >> >> /dev/tty[1..64] is the userspace API to the kernel VT subsystem. If you >> support it you need to match up all /dev/tty[1..64] with a >> /dev/vcs[1..64] + /dev/vcsa[1..64]. You need to expose a tty that >> understands TERM=linux and the ioctls listed on console_ioctl(4). You >> need /dev/tty0 as something that behaves like a symlink to the fg >> VT. You should also support files like /sys/class/tty/tty0/active with >> its POLLHUP iface. > > I sightly disagree with you. > /dev/tty[1..64] is not directly bound to VT. > You can have systems with CONFIG_VT=n and still have /dev/tty[1..64]. > Linux supports this perfectly. > UML does not have VT because having virtual consoles makes no sense. > (Same like on s390) > > Thanks, > //richard > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/