Re: vax wscons setting questions

Many :-)  We fixed graphics support in the late 90's on 3100's with X11 
as well.

But I did not refer specifically to wscons, I referred to that you don't 
create device nodes for devices that are not there.

-- R

Den 2024-02-04 kl. 13:43, skrev Johnny Billquist:
> So, how many machines have you been running where wscons would even be 
> an option?
>
> Of all the VAXen I've been running, I guess I could possibly have used 
> wscons on my 4000/90, once the graphics was somewhat working. But I've 
> never used the graphics console. I've been using serial all the time. 
> So definitely for me, wscons have never been even a topic.
>
>   Johnny
>
> On 2024-02-04 09:38, Anders Magnusson wrote:
>> It may go back to something else I think.
>>
>> I have never given a thought to the fact that I need to add new 
>> entries in /dev for new devices, it has always been a natural thing 
>> to do, wscons or not, but it might be that people expect a devfs to 
>> be present these days.
>>
>> -- Ragge
>>
>>
>> Den 2024-02-04 kl. 01:33, skrev Johnny Billquist:
>>> Well, I would argue that *very few* ever thought about using wscons 
>>> on VAX. Most would have been using a serial console, or else the 
>>> simple bit mapped console straight up.
>>>
>>> I certainly never even considered using wscons on VAXen. Although I 
>>> have been running VAXen more or less continously for about 30 years.
>>>
>>>   Johnny
>>>
>>> On 2024-02-04 00:55, Mouse wrote:
>>>>>>>> +    makedev wscons
>>>>>>> i'm surprised it is 2024 and we're doing this.
>>>>>> Doing what?  [...]
>>>>
>>>> [tsutsui@]
>>>>
>>>>> He also said "please do" so I assume it's obviously
>>>>> "to add wscons target to the default MAKEDEV all op"
>>>>
>>>> Hm, that didn't seem obvious to me.  I read it as, to expand a little,
>>>> "I'm surprised it's 2024 and we're still doing something this
>>>> backward" (with the "please do" being something along the lines of
>>>> "please do it, since that's how we still have to do it"). Perhaps I've
>>>> just seen too many people say things like "I'm surprised it's [date]
>>>> and [thing]" with meaning clearly (usually from additional text) of
>>>> "how come we're so behind the times".
>>>>
>>>> But, in this case, as mrg@ clarified,
>>>>
>>>>> that it took until 2024 to have this patch proposed.
>>>>
>>>> so I clearly was misreading.  My apologies.
>>>>
>>>>> that means anyone who has been using wscons on vax has been manually
>>>>> setting it up for a very long time....
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone?  I was under the impression - though formed mostly from
>>>> absence of evidence, not evidence of absence - that vax has been 
>>>> mostly
>>>> going unused ever since the broken compiler, the one that couldn't
>>>> self-host, was dropped in.
>>>>
>>>> It also wouldn't surprise me if the few diehards who have been 
>>>> using it
>>>> all this time have been upgrading existing installs, which for the
>>>> first switch to wscons likely meant manual fixups and since then have
>>>> been using existing /dev entries.
>>>>
>>>> Or have been using some other X, such as MIT X.  I sure know my few
>>>> brushes with X.org on non-peecee hardware have hardly enamoured me of
>>>> using it in cases where it's not actually needed (in my experience,
>>>> such need is most commonly for hardware support reasons).
>>>>
>>>> /~\ The ASCII                  Mouse
>>>> \ / Ribbon Campaign
>>>>   X  Against HTML       [email protected]
>>>> / \ Email!         7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
>>>
>>
>