From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753625Ab3GVMku (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:40:50 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:34200 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751105Ab3GVMkt (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:40:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:40:47 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Ramkumar Ramachandra Cc: LKML , Richard Weinberger Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: change defconfig to stop spawning xterm Message-ID: <20130722124047.GL4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1374258017-19606-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <51E988FF.9010201@nod.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:15:14PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > > [1]: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2013-July/012152.html > > ... and the patches were rejected. Lennart says that UML providing > /dev/tty* is wrong, and that UML should call them /dev/hvc* (or > something). Can we do something about the situation? Can we remove > /dev/tty*, and provide /dev/hvc*? Will we be breaking existing users? Yes, you would be breaking existing users. Starting with anybody with static /dev. Or a debian userland, for that matter. Any systemd-free setup, actually. Changing device number assignments is not to be done lightly, whether they should've been set that way back then or not. As for Lennart's opinion... *shrug* He's free to do whatever he wants in systemd. It does not translate into having any kind of control over the kernel.