Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ?
- Reply: Emmanuel Vadot : "Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ?"
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 01:23:42 UTC
On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 15:02, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > > But the operative word there is "still", isn't it ? > > There is nothing which prevents vt(4) from doing the right thing is there ? Just a simple matter of programming. We should indeed add dpms support to vt.