Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:55:57 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/kbdcontrol kbdcontrol.1 kbdcontrol.c Message-ID: <20010527185557.E96703E28@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <200105270912.f4R9CJo02995@mail.uic-in.net>; from sobomax@mail-in.net on "Sun, 27 May 2001 12:12:20 %2B0300 (EEST)"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@mail-in.net> writes: > On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:47:38 -0700 (PDT), Dima Dorfman wrote: > > dd 2001/05/26 17:47:38 PDT > > > > Modified files: > > usr.sbin/kbdcontrol kbdcontrol.1 kbdcontrol.c > > Log: > > Add a -c option which clears the history buffer using the new > > CONS_CLRHIST ioctl. > > Does it really belong to kbdcontrol(1)? For me it looks > counter-intuitive as this feature has nothing to do with > keyboard at all. IMO this (and `-h' BTW) option should be > moved into vidcontrol(1). I agree, but please think of backwards compatibility. -c is young enough that moving it to vidcontrol is no problem. -h, however, is different; it's already in -stable, and has been there for a long time. I suggest that we move both to vidcontrol, and have `kbdcontrol -h` print a "this option is now option -X in vidcontrol" or something similar. I'll do the necessary work for this. > This also would solve bootstrap issue. Not quite. It would just hide it until somebody adds an option to kbdcontrol which really does belong there. The fact that we have a highly system-specific (i.e., depends on intricacies in the kernel) tool being used to bootstrap the system is still a problem. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010527185557.E96703E28>