From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 26 04:25:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271FD106566B for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:25:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE1078FC14 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:25:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywp17 with SMTP id 17so5096209ywp.13 for ; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:25:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=MZHot++bD+slyTe2EXpeBXAtFgl7OmVykHgQGP82TNY=; b=MJxMTXhHV/LsvVHXOFEwSbD/FpCnOLa7/qOtecOv+KshbaHd8OEmlfWxf0c+Q8dwXA N/VNWcKdjrTmDsi358gaC5eue3il97ZxwscKNDHMYvNXzt5xzlcTDqJCy2Y0O7kBG0FE zO1JDsYLHn5oTuZL/gesGgcwP5YF5d1oxDHKE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.129.165 with SMTP id h25mr36278594yhi.38.1317011136220; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.111.42 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:25:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> References: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:25:36 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: GEwcBGOISUIE4IXFdie_d5AHIgQ Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Brett Glass Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Experiences with FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:25:37 -0000 I agree, the lack of a virtual/emergency terminal seems a bit silly. I'm not sure about the cons25 versus xterm stuff - you're not the first person to report this. Guys/girls/other (Hi SF!) - why is this? :) It shouldn't be that hard to submit a patch to enable those extra vtys? Adrian