Non-X text mode console

[Chris Snook]

David A. Wheeler wrote:
> I routinely use text mode console without X, for a
> variety of reasons.  For example:
> * I have a number of systems (servers) at runlevel 3
> * console is critically important when X fails. "Log in with ssh"
>   doesn't work when ssh or the network fails.
> * It's often much simpler to quickly log in to do a small task
>   rather than waiting for all the X + desktop startup stuff
> * I have some systems that have GUIs but not X at all
>   (e.g., use DirectFB directly to the framebuffer)... and
>   I sometimes need a recovery method, just like I do for X
> 
> I think it's clear from this discussion here that many people DO
> find non-X console mode useful, and thus, it shouldn't be removed:
> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski:
>> It does matter, since the removal affects me (and some other people, apparently),
>> while just keeping it means it will continue to work as it does now.
> 
> The complaints about non-X console mode failing to support
> "multiple fonts" are irrelevant.  I do not WANT text-mode
> console to support multiple fonts; that would interfere with
> console mode's advantages (e.g., small size, often works even when
> X fails). When I want fonts, I'll use X.
> 
> --- David A. Wheeler
> 

Unless I've missed something huge, virtual terminals aren't going away.  What 
may or may not be going away is the x86 video BIOS text mode, to be replaced 
with a kernel framebuffer, which precludes the use of console fonts, which very 
few people ever mess with.  The console itself will remain.  Someone please 
correct me if I'm wrong.

-- Chris