On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 08:51:27AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > Yes - that is why I didnt tell you about the ioctl.
> > It does not exist.
> > But if you are going to put things into an embedded system,
> > change the line
> > static int blankinterval = 10*60*HZ;
> > in console.c into
> > static int blankinterval = 0;
> > Andries
> Yes. Do you think there is a need for such an ioctl()? Or, more
> particularily, if I made one would it get put into the kernel?
Only Linus determines what is put into the kernel.
And I am not the keyboard and console maintainer.
Perhaps I was, long ago.
Would I like
blankinterval = arg;
? Perhaps. Easy and compact. Perhaps not. Apart from ioctl proliferation
and such concerns one might also worry about the possibility of several
consoles where only some must be blanked, etc. A single static variable
like blankinterval is no good. Having things in a struct also makes it
easier to manipulate VT state, to save and restore state.
I understand that you only need this for debugging.
In that case just doing s/10*60*HZ/0/ on the source seems easiest.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:15 EST