"Laurent Bercot" <ska-skaw...@skarnet.org> writes: >>While that might make sense when the system is expected to have a >>/dev/tty0 device, it is kind of messy to see that on systems that is not >>supposed to have /dev/tty0. > > Kernels and various parts of init systems print warning messages all > the time for similar reasons (some operation failed because it's not > supported in the current configuration), I don't think it's fair to > single out this one. I would prefer to do nothing.
I think it would be fair to be able to configure s6-linux-init so that it does not rely on specific details about what hardware is available. While virtual console is pretty much the standard on x86* platforms, on embedded systems that is definitely not the case. > That said, if it's important for more users, I could probably add a > verbosity setting, where -v0 would silence warning messages. > The problem is that it would do so for *all* warning messages, you'd > have no way to tell whether you missed a warning that was actually > relevant to you. Yes, I would definitely not prefer to have to silence warning messages in general. > And no, I'm not adding a separate switch for every warning message > in the program :P Of-course not. That would be crazy. While it is the warning message that meets my eye, the problem I am addressing here is not the warning message as such, but the fact that s6-linux-init will always try to open a virtual console, even on platforms that would never ever have that. A build-time configuration option for leaving that out would be fine, maybe even preferable. /Esben