On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:41:37AM +1100, dave b wrote: > So what's kind of why i asked about how you were trying to find the bug. > Don't tell me to search through lots of C code point it out! > I don't have time for that and you seemed to know more!
Please calm down and don't shout at me. I'm not willing to be treated this way. I don't have time for that. I never told you to search through lots of C code, neither do I know more. Besides my ability to successfully reproduce this on 2 systems with different hardware all I have are dark memories and wild guesses. I know the issue exists, I know it's nothing really new, and I know that all I have to do to work around it is to avoid GDM restarts. I never tried really hard to track it down, I just never wanted to spend the time it would take. This thread showed up on debian-devel@ and I just added my 2 cents in the hope that somebody probably could gain some ideas from it. Regarding the wild guesses: I personally somehow believe that any of the Gnome daemons transparently started in the background of Gnome applications causes this permanent VT allocation. As I said - it's nothing more than a wild guess - a gut instinct if you like. I cannot prove it. Of course, I already tried to find processes lingering around after stopping GDM - with no success. An idea to trace this down would be to track the processes which increase/decrease the tty usage count in the kernel. I have no idea if this is already possible with the current kernel infrastructure or how, but I'd be willing to run patched kernels to track it. > We so then the question is what happens if it is 'busy' and we attempt > to use it anyways ;) ? I don't think this should be the way to choose. I would personally prefer solving the cause over working around the result. regards Mario -- If you think technology can solve your problems you don't understand technology and you don't understand your problems. -- Bruce Schneier
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature