Kay Sievers wrote: > Oh, I meant turning is_vconsole() into returning success when it is > called for a tty0 that in fact doesn't work like tty0. :)
We might as well remove is_vconsole() then. Does it make sense to execute the rest of the code in vconsole-setup.c (fontmap, utf8 etc.) on a non-VT device? Should I, as the end-user, see that systemd-vconsole-setup.service passed even if my devices are non-VT? > That would make all the weird (I expect there are more things like > that) tty0 setups just skip the service without additional explicit > conditions in the unit file. I'm not sure I understand this rationale: when a device is broken in an unexpected way, we _should_ complain and tell the end-user. um Linux is a documented exception that we're making room for. I don't know of any other setups that have tty devices but don't implement VT emulation; do you? If you're so particular about keeping primary unit files "clean", may I suggest moving the exception code to vconsole-setup.c? _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel