From owner-freebsd-current Sun Jul 8 11:26:35 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from enterprise.spock.org (cm-24-29-85-81.nycap.rr.com [24.29.85.81]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873AB37B405 for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 11:26:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jon@enterprise.spock.org) Received: (from jon@localhost) by enterprise.spock.org serial EF600Q3T-B7F8823f68IQSB15600F7T for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 14:26:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jon)$ Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 14:26:28 -0400 From: Jonathan Chen To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: vty numbering with devfs Message-ID: <20010708142628.A13853@enterprise.spock.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: telnet/1.1x Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Pre-DEVFS, vty's were named ttyv0-ttyvf, ttyv10-ttyv1f, etc. When DEVFS is used, the vty's are numbered base-36 instead of base-16. This breaks X if the first 16 tty's are in use. What I want to know is whether we intended to implement this new scheme of tty numbering (to be consistant across all devices perhaps?) or whether this change was unintended. Either case, this should be a quick fix in either syscons or X. (Yes, I'm one of those loons who use 36 vty's) -Jon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message