Re: Future of Ruby: head for the hills

[Aivils S. <ai...@un...>]

On Sv=E7tdiena, 4. Septembris 2005 13:51, James van Zeeland wrote:
> As yitzhak has noted, we need to start a new documentation project.
>
> RIP ruby?
>
> Re: faketty + hijacled
>
> Since they are modules can we implement this as a kernel patch? Is there
> any impediment to statically compiling these - faketty and hijacled into
> kernel?

No. hijacled is one line patch by default, but devopled for stock
precompilded kernel. faketty fit under same rule as evdev.

> I'm not clear on the text and/or frambuffer console capabilities? Can
> we? Several text consoles with X and vt switching? Or is that expecting
> too much? :-)

Not capable.

> From here this needs to be tested and documented. It certainly sounds
> like a more effeicient approach than manhandling the console subsystem.
>
> I will be testing shortly and shall endeavour to write a HOWTO document
> as I go. I'll be testing and writing how-to under FC4, so we may need to
> note distribution specific details.
>
> Last rites on ruby?

Who wants continue Zoltan's work ?

Aivils