Darren J Moffat wrote:
> LingBo Tang wrote:
>
>>Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>
>>>LingBo Tang wrote:
>>>
- current VT usage model is not match with devname as other cases,
like pts and clearview;
- manage active link as symlink in devname filesystem requests expand
current devname.
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> LingBo Tang wrote:
>> - current VT usage model is not match with devname as other cases,
>> like pts and clearview;
>> - manage active link as symlink in devname filesystem requests expand
>> current devname.
>> - VT daemon can update the contents of "active link" by tw
FYI.
In general, we suggest to let "vtdaemon" maintain the symlink.
Original Message
Subject: devname and VT
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:03:12 +0800
From: LingBo Tang
To: Edward Pilatowicz , Vikram Hegde
, Jerry Gilliam , Artem
Kachitchkine
CC: virtual-console-iteam
Dear all
LingBo Tang wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> LingBo Tang wrote:
>>> - current VT usage model is not match with devname as other cases,
>>> like pts and clearview;
>>> - manage active link as symlink in devname filesystem requests expand
>>> current devname.
>>> - VT daemon can update the cont
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> LingBo Tang wrote:
>> logindevperm only take effect during login time and connecting
>> removable devices.
>> When previous session end, logindevperm will set these
>> devices back to 'root' to wait for next login regardless
>> whether there is another active session or not
LingBo Tang wrote:
> - current VT usage model is not match with devname as other cases,
> like pts and clearview;
> - manage active link as symlink in devname filesystem requests expand
> current devname.
> - VT daemon can update the contents of "active link" by two syscalls,
> which only hav
Okay I'm convinced that this helps.
However I really still want to know what part of the system is
maintaining this symlink. I want to make sure that is *always* correct.
--
Darren J Moffat
