[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANq1E4RSEEq2n0GK8FNdvfu=GLOtH2Y4xBZ5UZbnLOo0HPjCcg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:58:22 +0100
From: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
To: simone.weiss@....de
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
helene.gsaenger@...dium.fau.de, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, mark.d.rustad@...el.com,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...cs.fau.de
Subject: Re: questions to planned lock-functionality for vts
Hi
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 3:48 PM, <simone.weiss@....de> wrote:
> Our approch would be more universal, it wouldn't only work when wayland is
> used, but as well on servers and systems that are not going to use
> wayland.
This has nothing to do with Wayland. I just said doing it like Wayland
compositors do it. That is, handle it inside of the running
application, instead of reserving a separate VT.
Thanks
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists