Ubuntu QA:
BlogBrainstormPackage status
Log in
Ubuntu QA
The Ubuntu community has contributed 21986 ideas, 135057 comments, 2615221 votes
Idea sandbox Idea sandbox
Popular ideas Popular ideas
Ideas in development Ideas in development
Implemented ideas Implemented ideas
Idea #8915: No Virtual Terminals

Written by gQuigs the 21 May 08 at 21:36. Category: Look and Feel. Related project: Nothing/Others. Status: New
Rationale
On a default desktop system why should we expect users to have any use for non-X virtual terminals? Unfortunately, many of us, use them when we have a problem (program hangs, etc) We need to be "forced" to use them same GUI tools (Gnome-System-Monitor) that the average user would try to use to kill a crashed program.

Notes: Proposal just for desktop. Also, make it relatively easy to turn them back on.

Dependencies:
Requires not using uSplash and just going to X really fast?

Possible Benefits:
Saved Memory: 5-10 Megs? (peanuts but still)
Slicker/Faster Bootup: priceless
No way to accidentally find themselves at a VT
Mostly for the average user

Possible Negatives:
If our GUI tools aren't up to the task of recovering from some crashes
Mostly for the developer/advanced user

*Please tell me items to add to above lists*
Tags: (none)

-35
votes
up equal down
Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #8915
Written by gQuigs the 21 May 08 at 21:36.
Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #8915 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

Propose your solution

Attachments
No attachments.


Duplicates


Comments
Eldmannen wrote on the 21 May 08 at 21:49
I like virtual terminals (except for that they are so low-res and use some strange font)

glibik wrote on the 22 May 08 at 03:48
Eldmannen, do a search for framebuffer and the "vga=" kernel argument for your grub config file.

I use vga=794 for a 1280x1024 LCD monitor. :-)


BTW: Vote = -1

jhoger wrote on the 22 May 08 at 04:50
For those that like virtual terminals and ability to use GUI apps at the same time, there are good compromises between the two like

Ion, Ratpoison, WMII, dwm, etc.

But when X is misconfigured the text only virtual terminals are pretty handy.

gQuigs wrote on the 22 May 08 at 05:36
Would it be possible to have X as all that is started up by default and then have it start up the virtual terminal when/if X fails?

holizz wrote on the 22 May 08 at 09:23
> Possible Negatives:
> If our GUI tools aren't up to the task of recovering from some crashes

Uh yeah, then what do you do?

supercarrot wrote on the 22 May 08 at 11:34
PLEASE leave them ALONE! I see no reason to remove this functionality that is hurting nobody. I really like the virtual terminals, they are just to handy and should be left on by default. In my opinion, this is one of the mistakes that Unix has, by no providing this ever so simple option.

VisitorQ wrote on the 22 May 08 at 21:23
I have good experiences with the extra terminals. Please let them be. If users switch to these terminals for the first time (people might try some button combinations when start using ubuntu or expect a compiz effect), display a warning window and a checkbox to not-show again, in which you can disable the access to other terminals....

Well, skip the disabling of the access, I really see no point in this. But the warning would be nice.

Ssdg wrote on the 23 May 08 at 14:36
I love them (and specially the 3 thirst of them) for 1 reason:
when one of my programs pumps all the ressources crashing, I usually have 3 other important jobs I don't want to loose and I usually need a manpage, top or a "ps aux|less" and a third console to kill the coupable process so I want 3 consoles and I don't want to learn to use screen.


Post your comment