Re: Faketty modified

[Zoltan B. <zb...@fr...>]

Hugo Vanwoerkom =EDrta:
> --- Zoltan Boszormenyi <zb...@fr...> wrote:
>
>  =20
>> Hi,
>>
>> first, I would like to thank you for the faketty
>> module,
>> I stopped maintaining the ruby patch and was able to
>> quickly
>> restore my multihead machine after upgrading to FC5.
>>
>> I would like to know what do you think about the
>> following modifications.
>>
>> - Instead of the "ftty%d" device names, use "tty%d",
>>   count from the number of normal TTY devices and
>> up,
>>   e.g. ftty0 -> tty64, etc.
>> - RC script now don't delete tty devices to create
>> symlinks.
>> - Also, RC script can use the "chkconfig" facility,
>> use
>>   "make install-service-rh" to install it that way.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Zolt=EF=BF=BDn B=EF=BF=BDsz=EF=BF=BDrm=EF=BF=BDnyi
>>    =20
>
>
> And the reason for changes? I kind of like it the way
> it is.
>
> Hugo
>  =20

Reason #1: It's not really legal to delete device nodes that are
controlled by another driver.

Reason #2: Given #1 above, it would be more useful to just
create links as /dev/tty64 and up and still have ftty devices.
It would be best to use an udev rule, but I haven't seen any way
to do it. E.g. suppose that SYMLINK command can use options,
and %m gives you the minor number of the device it has just created,
this latter being an existing udev feature. Now, a rule like this would d=
o:
KERNEL=3D=3D"ftty" GROUP=3D"tty" MODE=3D"0660", SYMLINK=3D"tty(64+%m)"

But you cannot really detect the maximum number of the TTY device nodes
just by looking at them, something else may have deleted them, too.
As I see now, the only reliable way to detect the next number is using
"MAX_NR_CONSOLES + 1" for the running kernel.
I would be happy to be proven wrong, though.

Best regards,
Zolt=E1n B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi