On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 01:34:21 +0000 Alexey Dokuchaev <da...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 02:42:07PM +0000, Aleksandr Rybalko wrote: > > New Revision: 287782 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/287782 > > > > Log: > > MFC: r272715 > > Allow vt(4) to disable terminal bell with > > `sysctl kern.vt.bell_enable=0`, similar as syscons(4) do. > > [...] > > +VT_SYSCTL_INT(enable_bell, 1, "Enable bell"); > > I think you've meant `sysctl kern.vt.enable_bell=0' in the commit log. Yes. Just copied message with mistake of original commit. Sorry for that. :) > > > + if (!vt_enable_bell) > > + return; > > + > > if (vd->vd_flags & VDF_QUIET_BELL) > > return; > > Hm, I'm wondering why having another sysctl is required when there's already > a way to shut the bell up with VDF_QUIET_BELL flag? Many guys found sysctl way as most comfort. I have no objections, because that way was present in the syscons(4). Name was changed to more obvious one, since '.bell' may be treated as type of bell, but switch just do enable/disable. > > Also, there's certain naming inconsistency between syscons(4) and vt(4). > On my stable/8 laptop, I see this: > > $ sysctl -d hw.syscons.bell > hw.syscons.bell: enable bell > > On my -CURRENT desktop, this: > > $ sysctl -d kern.vt.enable_bell > kern.vt.enable_bell: Enable bell > > ./danfe Thanks you, Alexey! WBW -- Aleksandr Rybalko <r...@freebsd.org> _______________________________________________ svn-src-stable-10@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-stable-10 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-stable-10-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
