Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Feb 1997 17:34:41 +1100
From:      David Nugent <davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au>
To:        Kazutaka YOKOTA <yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp>
Cc:        freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org, David Nugent <davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au>, Zach Heilig <zach@blizzard.gaffaneys.com>
Subject:   Re: moused and X11R6
Message-ID:  <19970211173441.56628@usn.blaze.net.au>
In-Reply-To: <199702110631.PAA06663@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp>; from Kazutaka YOKOTA on Feb 02, 1997 at 03:31:47PM
References:  <876804rsia.fsf@murkwood.gaffaneys.com> <Pine.BSF.3.95.970207222919.2151A-100000@chaos.ecpnet.com> <19970208165555.12961@usn.blaze.net.au> <87bu9venx6.fsf@murkwood.gaffaneys.com> <19970208201732.37402@usn.blaze.net.au> <87g1z47bc6.fsf@murkwood.gaffaneys.com> <199702110324.MAA00887@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> <19970211162236.64243@usn.blaze.net.au> <199702110631.PAA06663@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 02, 1997 at 03:31:47PM, Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
> >I had assumed by "in the virtual terminal that was later used
> >to run X" meant the actual vt that X runs on (presumably after
> >it had been disabled), rather than the one from which it was
> >started. I can see how that might cause conflicts since it
> >would relate vt switching.
> 
> Well, but, is it possible to have `vidcontrol -m on' in the same
> virtual terminal as X? I thought not. The X server runs in an unused
> virtual terminal; UNUSED terminal being the one to which no login is
> possible because getty is not running in it, thus, we cannot have
> `vidcontrol -m on' there.

Enable getty, login, vidcontrol -m on, logout, disable getty,
kill -HUP 1.

Well, that's what I had assumed. :-) I have no idea if it works
or not, but the state of the mouse does seem to be 'sticky'
through last close.


> Wait, I will check the XFree86 man page... Hmmm, with a command line
> option, the XFree86 X server can be instructed to run in a specific
> virtual terminal. Is this the scenario are we discussing here?

I can only assume so. Going back to the other way, I certainly
can't reproduce the problem.


Regards,

David Nugent - Unique Computing Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Australia
Voice +61-3-9791-9547  Data/BBS +61-3-9792-3507  3:632/348@fidonet
davidn@freebsd.org davidn@blaze.net.au http://www.blaze.net.au/~davidn/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970211173441.56628>