Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:28:48 +0200 | From | Jörn Engel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Console: fall back to /dev/null when no console is availlable |
| |
On Wed, 6 October 2004 16:23:27 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Ehrm, what do you mean with `default' console? > > If you mean `console as defined under nr.2', correct > yes, you want the console that > does do input.
*I* don't always do. Remember how this thread got started? ;)
> > Taking the last one registered is basically random. If people care > > enough, they should explicitly state things on the command line. > > No, it's not. It's explicitly mentioned in the docs: if you use multiple > `console=', all of them get output, but input comes from the last one.
Ah, true. I was barking up the "the was no 'console=' option, take the default" tree. Just started looking at the console code a few days ago.
Still, it currently is the official interface and allows the user to do the right thing. It doesn't exactly make it hard to do the wrong thing, though. On Rusty's scale it should rate as 7 or 8. http://www.ozlabs.com/~rusty/ols-2003-keynote/img48.html
Can you think of a simple way to improve things?
Jörn
-- To recognize individual spam features you have to try to get into the mind of the spammer, and frankly I want to spend as little time inside the minds of spammers as possible. -- Paul Graham - 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/
| |