On 2013-06-09 20:48, Eric Haszlakiewicz wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 03:50:39AM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:On 2013-06-05 18:57, Eric Haszlakiewicz wrote:Why is it machine dependent? Are there arch's that don't use wscons, so the tty's to use end up being different?Why do you assume all consoles are wscons based?Because using a consistent interface for consoles seems like it would make sense, and I assumed that wscons IS that consistent interface. In fact, that seem to be what the man page claims: The wscons driver provides support for machine independent access to the console.
But it have a lot of requirements for it to even be possible. The most ubiquitous console interface (which others have already mentioned) is the simple serial interface. No way that can ever be something wscons-based.
"Make sense" is rather far down the list of things. :-) That is like saying that all serial interface terminals should speak the same protocol for controls (which also is not the case).
Heck, even wscons itself is not that old in NetBSD... (Well, ok, I am old, I guess...)
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol