![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>> P.S. Paul Gortmaker's patches to display more information about which >> programs were using the /dev/cuaXX devices is a Good Thing. I should >> have thought of doing that, but I didn't. >Would it be disasterous to change their major number to be the same, or >convince the distribution maintainers to make cua -> tty? Yes. Please remember that device locking is done in user land, by files named "LCK..ttyS*". If you have multiple names for the same device, programs won't notice that "ttyS0" is already in use, if someone else has "cua0" locked via the "LCK..cua0" lock file. This is *exactly* what got us into this mess - we have to get rid of the stupid idea of having multiple names for the very same device *FAST*. It's a support nightmare (I'm the "a getty maintainer" Tytso mentioned who wanted cua* support dropped ASAP). I think Ted's idea is very good. We have to really hammer into people that cua* devices are deprecated, and that only works if you flood them with warning messages all over (I have been *telling* everybody this for years, but this wasn't enough). gert -- email: gert@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-3244814 http://www.leo.org/~doering Lawrence Radiation Laboratory keeps all its data in an old gray trunk. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41 [W:0.147 / U:0.030 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||