Re: 2.6.8.1-kernel on Powerbook G4?
> | It got me thinking - could it help to add
> | lines like:
> | L tty1 /dev/vc/1
> | L tty2 /dev/vc/2
> | L tty3 /dev/vc/3
> | L tty4 /dev/vc/4
> | L tty5 /dev/vc/5
> | L tty6 /dev/vc/6
> | to the /etc/udev/links.conf?
>
> I would say that is not the best solution. I am under the impression
> that the debian maintainer added links.conf to udev as an interim
> workaround for certain limitations in certain versions of udev and the
> kernel. (for example, earlier 2.6 kernels didn't have any sysfs info
> for the framebuffer and some other devices like that needed this
> "hard-coded" information)
If it is an interim solution isn't the Linking way kindof correct? After
all - if I got you right - vc/x is the way it is going to be. So the
links to tty should not really pose any Problems if things get up-to-
date, should they?
> The better approach, IMO, is to create the apropriate udev rules so
> the files/links are created automatically (instead of statically
> through links.conf) or to adjust the inittab to look for the
> devfs-style name.
I didn't want to touch the rules themselves because I have seen
them being updated on several occasions and I wouldn't want to have
to readjust them everytime that happens. Since udev is kindof new I
wouldn't want to miss an important update either.
> What version of udev are you using? At some point the directory
> /etc/udev/rules.d was introduced as a way to specify which rules you
> want udev to apply. By default it contains a symlink to
> /etc/udev/udev.rules which is a set of rules creating traditional
> names. On my systems, since I had used devfs for quite some time, I
> remove that link and instead put symlinks to /etc/udev/devfs.rules and
> /etc/udev/compat-full.rules. The former gives devfs-style names, and
> the latter creates the "comaptibility" symlinks like devfsd used to
> do.
>
Interesting - once more I learned something :) thx.
> I also changed my inittab to have the following section:
> 1:2345:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty1 -f /etc/issue.linuxlogo
> 2:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty2 -f /etc/issue.linuxlogo
> 3:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty3 -f /etc/issue.linuxlogo
> 4:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 vc/4
> 5:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 vc/5
> 6:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty6
>
> With some gettys using the traditional name and some using the
> devfs-style name I will have at least one console functioning
> regardless of what sort of /dev configuration I boot with. (basically
> this is just a safety net in case somehow I boot and the symlinks
> aren't there or something)
So I could alternatively have changed the tty1 in the inittab to vc/1?
And that sould have had the same effect as letting getty look at tty1
linked to vc/1. Hm. Sounds like the "cleaner" approach. Might try that,
too.
thx again,
Timo
Reply to: