[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Non-X text mode console



David A. Wheeler wrote:
I routinely use text mode console without X, for a
variety of reasons.  For example:
* I have a number of systems (servers) at runlevel 3
* console is critically important when X fails. "Log in with ssh"
  doesn't work when ssh or the network fails.
* It's often much simpler to quickly log in to do a small task
  rather than waiting for all the X + desktop startup stuff
* I have some systems that have GUIs but not X at all
  (e.g., use DirectFB directly to the framebuffer)... and
  I sometimes need a recovery method, just like I do for X

I think it's clear from this discussion here that many people DO
find non-X console mode useful, and thus, it shouldn't be removed:
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski:
It does matter, since the removal affects me (and some other people, apparently),
while just keeping it means it will continue to work as it does now.

The complaints about non-X console mode failing to support
"multiple fonts" are irrelevant.  I do not WANT text-mode
console to support multiple fonts; that would interfere with
console mode's advantages (e.g., small size, often works even when
X fails). When I want fonts, I'll use X.

--- David A. Wheeler


Unless I've missed something huge, virtual terminals aren't going away. What may or may not be going away is the x86 video BIOS text mode, to be replaced with a kernel framebuffer, which precludes the use of console fonts, which very few people ever mess with. The console itself will remain. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

-- Chris


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]