Re: Bug#185450: missing virtual terminal ioctl's

[Marcus Brinkmann]

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 08:47:47PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > We will not implement those ioctls, and they will certainly not be
> > implemented in the terminal server (or magic for that matter).
> > 
> > It's also unrelated to a console server.
> > 
> > The issue is between the vga console client that shares the display and
> > input devices with the X server.  That console client must have a protocol
> > that allows cooperative console switching
> 
> why can't it be the standard protocol? magic could forward its ioctl'ed
> requests to the console client?

"Standard" is a bit far stretched.  We are talking about a solution that is
shared by BSD and Linux, I think, which are both monolithic Unix like
kernels, and thus have a different understanding about how things should
work.

Of course it could be the same protocol, but it would be silly.  You
would insert a man in the middle which has really nothing to do with this
whatsoever.
 
> > The protocol will be just as we see it convenient and useful, and not be
> > tied to the ioctl interface.  The corresponding code in XFree86 must be
> > ported (rewritten).
> 
> the Xfree86 side it's not that much of a hassle, just to find a replacement
> for VT_ACTIVATE #ifndef VT_ACTIVATE. what is your proposed protocol?

If I had one you would find it in the savannah task item about it.
 
> > This bug is a will-not-fix or a non-bug.  See also the savannah task
> > database, I am sure I have one open for that.
> 
> ok, but then we need a new protocol to tell the console client about
> terminal switches.

That's what I keep saying :)

It needs to be cooperative, but it can be simple.  It also can assume trust
between the communication partners (ie proper behaviour).

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    marcus@gnu.org
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/