From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jan 21 13:21:35 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5DC837B401 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E6A43F6B for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.201]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LLLPMW024295; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LLLYgZ000880; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0LLLXtI000879; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:21:32 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: the mythical syscons redesign document ( was Re: Porting wscons ) Message-ID: <20030121212132.GA593@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20030120230141.GA641@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030121044713.95115.qmail@web13406.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030121044713.95115.qmail@web13406.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 05:47:13AM +0100, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > OK, I found it: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=302402+322879+/usr/local/www/db/text/1998/freebsd-current/19980802.freebsd-current It makes perfect sense to me why this hasn't been implemented. Not because it's wrong, but because it's impractical. For example, the ext/int mapper is not wrong per se, but it not specific to consoles. It should not be made part of the definition. The problem of encoding should be referenced or mentioned as a sidenoot or footnote, but lack of experience, practical value or even feasibility to address it in its entirety should have resulted in it being abstracted away. I'm not aware of any implementation that has it, which is exactly the point I'm getting at. An interesting read for historical reasons, but not really for the problem at hand. I still don't know how X is or would be affected if we would change our console implementation... -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message