kms and VT switch

[mobi at mobiphil.com (mobi phil)]

??

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 9:57 AM, mobi phil <mobi at mobiphil.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> probably most of linux users would not use anything more than X
> windows for graphical interface. I think this was always both a cause
> and a consequence. Having X controlling the hardware, nobody else
> could do the same without potentially even crashing the system.
>
> Kms/drm are more than welcome. I discovered recently that
> unfortunately one specific thing did not change under kms/drm. And
> this is the fact that if one application has control over kms, nobody
> else can do that. I find it wrong. If you run Xwindows, you cannot do
> kms control from another application. This means again that non-X
> applications will have again smaller chance to "penetrate" our
> desktops.
>
> I would find it more appropriate to have minimal policy in the kernel,
> and let VT switch change the "ownership" of the kms. One would be able
> to start several kms applications under different VT's. The active VT
> will activelly control kms, whereas non active VT's kms related
> commands would be ignored.
>
> please tell me your opinion
>
>
> rgrds,
> mobi phil
>
> being mobile, but including technology
> http://mobiphil.com
>



-- 
rgrds,
mobi phil

being mobile, but including technology
http://mobiphil.com