On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 10:40 -0400, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:34 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote: > > > As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand > > > the thinking behind it. > > > > Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message > > on the fedora-test list: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2008-September/msg00314.html > > which indicates that the motivation is much more to do with cleaning up > > code and APIs. I fact security isn't mentioned. > > > > poc > > > > > It's still a stupid idea. There's no good reason to get rid of the vt > consoles; they've been there for a very long time on rh, I use them all > the time. As does alot of other people. As one other user pointed out > on the link that *you provided, the lack of vt consoles is the number > one problem with another distro, according to it's users.
AFAIK no-one is suggesting simply getting rid of the VT consoles without substituting something else. That would be a dumb idea and I doubt it's being considered. Alan's message enumerates the uses of VT and it's clear that these uses aren't going to go away. He even says this explicitly. poc -- fedora-list mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
