True, but it's one brick in a lengthy series of stupid and sillyOn Tue, 2008-10-28 at 09:06 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 16:24 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 04:49:33PM +0200, shmuel siegel
> wrote:
> > > Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the code did
> that
> > > deliberately? Maybe someone thought that it would be a
> good idea for
> > > usable consoles numbers to start at 1? Or someone thought
> that once
> > > people started down a certain path with conventions, it
> shouldn't be
> > > changed unless the people saw a real benefit.
> >
> > Haven't you heard? If you're not a graphical-only
> desktop-type single
> > user working on a laptop, you're not relevant.
>
> Exactly - nothing much to add.
>
> Time to evaluate other distros.
>
>
>
> I can think of better reasons to switch distros other than what tty X
> is run on.
decisions, which have been gradually running down Fedora into this
single-user windows clone it has evolved into.
I'm not sure why you think it is stupid and silly. Perhaps I have not read this tread closely enough. I personally think it is totally irrelevant and I could care less if X is run on tty1, tty7 or tty4 for that matter.
Is there some technical reason to keep X on tty7 other than "that's the way it has always been"?
I don't see how tty7 or tty1 makes any difference to a desktop user, or a server user, or a newbie or an expert.
Linux has evolved away from many anachronistic traditions of Unix, I don't see how this is any different.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
