Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 15:31:31 -0400 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should 9.3 carry a warning about NEW_XORG Message-ID: <CAPyFy2BhARs%2BwxhOuP-09tcPgzerU00_ARy=o4OyKec9azTOkQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <E1X32XF-000PnU-QG@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk> References: <53B69B88.4060803@gmail.com> <E1X32XF-000PnU-QG@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4 July 2014 08:24, Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk> wrote: > > I am following this with some interest - I was under the impression that > from 9.3 onwards vt(4) was included by default. is this not tre ? Do > I still need to recompile to use vt ? In HEAD syscons(4) and vt(4) are now both compiled in by default in the GENERIC kernel. Syscons remains the default at the moment; you can set the loader tunable kern.vty=vt to choose vt(4) instead. Vt is selected automatically if booting via UEFI on amd64. Both stable/10 and stable/9 require a recompile to use vt(4). The plan is to merge these changes from HEAD in time for 10.1, but 9.3 will not have them. Note that vt(4) enables vty switching from Xorg, but WITH_NEW_XORG generally should not depend on vt(4). X should work fine, just without the ability to switch back to a vty. If WITH_NEW_XORG fails on certain hardware I think it'll be independent of the use of sc(v) vs vt(4). -Ed
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2BhARs%2BwxhOuP-09tcPgzerU00_ARy=o4OyKec9azTOkQ>