On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 14:34 +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
Brian Wheeler wrote:
> I'm going to agree with the -1.
>
> Almost all of the "reasons" from the original email boil down to
"we've
> always done it this way".
>
>
And what about the other reasons?
There have been two reasons given for maintaining the change.
1) Your use case doesn't interest me.
2) We've thought of a way to accomplish our goal. There have been no
responses to the question if other methods would accomplish the same
objective.
I'm still trying to figure out why there's all the love for X on tty7.
Things change. We adapt. Having the primary interface on tty1 makes
much more sense than it being on tty7. On a semi-serious note, the tty7
choice is a historical accident...not a design choice.
OSS has been replaced.
Static /dev has been replaced.
SysV init has been replaced.
IDE drives aren't /dev/hd* anymore.
We're using LVM instead of raw partitions.
All of these things (and more) caused a bit of trouble when they were
first introduced and then became the norm.
Brian