[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GDM, getty and VTs

Le samedi 14 novembre 2009 à 17:42 +0100, Bernhard R. Link a écrit : 
> * Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> [091114 17:26]:
> > > I guess you mean as long as there is no negociation between gdm and
> > > whatever decides where gettys go?
> >
> > GDM does try to use a VT that is not currently in use - although there
> > can be race conditions.
> So gdm does not negotiate but just claims "first!".

What else can it do? It has to manage its VTs for itself. Currently it
is simply forced to use the ones starting from tty7, but it is arbitrary
and inconsistent.

> Actually init has nothing to do with consoles. It does not start
> consoles but programs, one one of those is getty. And while having
> no "some other program is buggy and used the tty I am supposed to use"
> warning is annoying, not having your consoles because something breaks
> and the system thinks they are still in use would be even worse.

I’m not sure it is best fixed in init itself (which is why I’m asking
about upstart’s capabilities). But in all cases I think we’d be better
if text consoles could be dynamically allocated just like graphical

> P.S:
> That said, reducing text consoles running might be a sensible thing.
> (Even I stopped to reconfigure every installed computer to have 8
> instead only 6 getties since about a release). But arguing it is
> necessary because a bug in gdm should not cause bugy behaviour, is ...

You are just trolling. I precisely want to fix the bug in GDM the
correct way - and I don’t think re-introducing a VT manager in GDM
itself is the best solution.

 .''`.      Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'   “I recommend you to learn English in hope that you in
  `-     future understand things”  -- Jörg Schilling

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: