Re: VTs (was: How to get more developers)
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Norbert Nemec wrote:
> > I say screw VTs. screen kicks soooo much ass, VTs are a waste of
> > time. The ability to just say 'go to the window where I'm running
> > emacs' slays 'hmm, where was emacs. VT1? nope. VT4? hm, no. VT2? ahh,
> > oh this isn't emacs. VT3, alright here we go...now what was I gonna
> > do?' VTs can be "useful" in a vague sense, but I don't think its
> > really much of a priority.
> For me it would be of very high priority!
You have multiple virtual terminals provided by the screen utility. We put
a huge effort into making it work, so please use it.
Virtual terminals will never be in the kernel, they will be in the terminal
server (or one of the two). Try a google search on colortext and you will
learn what I mean. I am sure Kalle appreciates input on this.
However, there will be little difference between vt's in the terminal server
and the screen program from a users perspective.
> Just as having more than just
> 80x25 characters.
There was recently posted a port of svgatextmode to the Hurd.
Check the mailing list archive.
> I absolutely hate the feeling of being confined to just one console. Maybe,
> I'm a claustrophobic in that aspect - but that's part of the reason I never
> got beyond a plain install of the HURD and ~1 hour of fiddling around.
If that's the only reason, I should advise you to extend the hour to a time
that allows you to find out about screen :) I use plenty of virtual consoles
when I am working on the Hurd.
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org for public PGP Key
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de, email@example.com PGP Key ID 36E7CD09