Announcing Fedora 11 Alpha (blink)

[Christopher Brown]

2009/2/10 Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan at gmail.com>:
> On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 11:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 11:33 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> [...]
>
>> > In this kind of situation it would be nice to have an unblockable
>> > attention key, like SysRq but not so low-level. Something that would
>> > simply force the system into VT2 for example, and didn't depend on X
>> > working.
>>
>> You can't do that, really.  Getting to vt2 requires getting X to let go
>> of the hardware, because the vt subsystem is a raging pile of trash that
>> we would be _far_ better off just deleting.  Read that again: X has to
>> voluntarily relinquish the hardware.  If it isn't responding to c-a-bs,
>> it certainly isn't going to respond to any other requests.
>
> OK.
>
>> But nooooo.  Gotta keep having VTs so we can recover when X screws up.
>> I mean, it's the unix way.  Which apparently means designing failure in
>> from the start, and calling it a feature.
>>
>> This is a bad design.  The panic button doesn't make it better, it just
>> makes it okay to be even worse than the design requires.  Take the
>> training wheels off already.
>
> Do you have an alternative suggestion?

I think this is the intention with removing c-a-d. If you remove the
quick fix to a crashing app, people are more likely to try and find a
way of fixing the crashing app. No?

-- 
Christopher Brown