Oh, come on. Perhaps the vc system should be modularized, but frankly,
the Linux vc/terminal system is the nicest I've used in years. I
personally think screen is someone's idea of a big joke...the vc
system is a lot more reliable overall, and does it the right way.
I agree that Linux's vc has its advantages over screen, but there are also
things screen offers that Linux doesn't (longer scrollback, cut and paste
without a mouse, saving screen contents to a file ... ). You should keep in
mind that screen wasn't written as a replacement for the Linux console or any
other virtual console system, but to give that functionality to people using
e.g. VT100 terminals or dial-in connections. I spent half a year at a french
university and the only computer access I had was through a VT100 connected to
a DEC Alpha. Screen certainly made my life a lot easier there. I definitely
don't think it's a joke.
Not to mention that screen would have a much harder time supporting
switching between a graphic screen and the text terminal. Yes, there
are ways to do it, but the current system works darn well...it ain't
broke, leave it alone. Thank you.
I agree. Although I wouldn't mind improvements such as increasing the size of
the scrollback buffer or making it possible to do scrollback after switching
from one vc to another.
Achim
PS: Sorry this reply comes a week after the original message, but I only got
the digest containing it today :-(. It seems that vger.rutgers.edu has some
problems keeping up with all the linux mailing list traffic (gcc-digest seems
to have the same problems).