SEO

I am running Ubuntu 7.10 on an IBM ThinkCentre and am unable to invoke
a virtual terminal from the GUI; all I get is a blank screen, although
I can return to the GUI with ctrl-alt-f7. I think it may be a Ubuntu
bug having to do with framebuffers but am unable to get any good info
from the Ubu people. Can anyone provide info or some fix?
TIA

Geoffrey

On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am running Ubuntu 7.10 on an IBM ThinkCentre and am unable to invoke
> a virtual terminal from the GUI; all I get is a blank screen, although
> I can return to the GUI with ctrl-alt-f7. I think it may be a Ubuntu
> bug having to do with framebuffers but am unable to get any good info
> from the Ubu people. Can anyone provide info or some fix?
> TIA
>
> Geoffrey


Do you mean getting a console, a tty, by doing, for example:

ctrl-alt-f2?

You expect a bash login prompt like this:

Welcome to Linux 2.6....

<hostname> login: _

??

If so, that would be configured in /etc/inittab with a
line like this:

c2:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty2 linux

I don't see what framebuffers would have to do with it,
though I suppose you could be right.

But I suspect that the screen isn't entirely blank, that
there is a flashing cursor in the upper left hand corner,
and that the problem is that you just aren't running agetty
there.

Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
problem.

Here's the complete section of that file from my box:

# These are the standard console login getties in multiuser mode:
c1:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty1 linux
c2:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty2 linux
#c3:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty3 linux
#c4:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty4 linux
#c5:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty5 linux
#c6:12345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty6 linux

I startx from tty1, and it runs on tty3, and I only run one
VT besides those.

Slackware here, but that's pretty universal. Not sure about
the "c1" etc., but the "12345" refer to runlevels.


Tom

--
calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tom Newton wrote:
| On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
|> I am running Ubuntu 7.10 on an IBM ThinkCentre and am unable to invoke
|> a virtual terminal from the GUI; all I get is a blank screen, although
|> I can return to the GUI with ctrl-alt-f7. I think it may be a Ubuntu
|> bug having to do with framebuffers but am unable to get any good info
|> from the Ubu people. Can anyone provide info or some fix?
|> TIA
|>
|> Geoffrey
|
|
| Do you mean getting a console, a tty, by doing, for example:
|
| ctrl-alt-f2?
|
| You expect a bash login prompt like this:
|
| Welcome to Linux 2.6....
|
| <hostname> login: _
|
| ??
|
| If so, that would be configured in /etc/inittab with a
| line like this:
|
| c2:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty2 linux
|
| I don't see what framebuffers would have to do with it,
| though I suppose you could be right.
|
| But I suspect that the screen isn't entirely blank, that
| there is a flashing cursor in the upper left hand corner,
| and that the problem is that you just aren't running agetty
| there.
|
| Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
| problem.

I thought the same thing, until I fired up my Ubuntu-powered laptop to take a
look. <ctrl><alt><f1> /did/ take me to a prompt, though, so something isn't
entirely right in the OP's setup.

While your suggestion would work on most other distros, it appears that Ubuntu
doesn't use the /etc/inittab at all. Instead, it uses scripts in the
/etc/event.d directory to manage the process. The OP should check that the
scripts /etc/event.d/tty[1-6] exist, and contain the requisite
~ exec /sbin/getty 38400 tty?
line, along with the rest of the wrapper script.

FWIW, Canonical replaced the usual init(8) with one of their own; telinit
(which is a hardlink to init) returns
~ telininit (upstart 0.3.8)
~ Copyright (C) 2007 Canonical Ltd.
when I execute "telinit --version" on my Ubuntu system.


[snip]

- --
Lew Pitcher

Master Codewright & JOAT-in-training | Registered Linux User #112576
http://pitcher.digitalfreehold.ca/ | GPG public key available by request
- ---------- Slackware - Because I know what I'm doing. ------


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Armoured with GnuPG

iD8DBQFHyJdgagVFX4UWr64RAo0sAKCrvpdMGUJh/ByWPWDe+fuyixCHOACgzwCB
6/qzyK/eqqElX6SsULe5R/4=
=kdk6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Tom Newton wrote:
>| On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:

<snip>

>| Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
>| problem.
>
> I thought the same thing, until I fired up my Ubuntu-powered
> laptop to take a look. <ctrl><alt><f1> /did/ take me to a
> prompt, though, so something isn't entirely right in the OP's
> setup.
>
> While your suggestion would work on most other distros, it
> appears that Ubuntu doesn't use the /etc/inittab at all.
> Instead, it uses scripts in the /etc/event.d directory to
> manage the process. The OP should check that the scripts
> /etc/event.d/tty[1-6] exist, and contain the requisite ~ exec
> /sbin/getty 38400 tty? line, along with the rest of the wrapper
> script.

Thanks for that, Lew.

The above changes that Ubuntu has made bother me. It's like a
car manufacturer altering a standard part with a tried and true
design just to force its customers to buy only its parts.

In this case, to phone only its technical support people...

I will not be recommending Ubuntu to anyone in the future.

>
> FWIW, Canonical replaced the usual init(8) with one of their
> own; telinit (which is a hardlink to init) returns ~ telininit
> (upstart 0.3.8) ~ Copyright (C) 2007 Canonical Ltd. when I
> execute "telinit --version" on my Ubuntu system.

Arrrggggghh! Effing Business is turning Linux into a tower
of babel. At this rate it won't be long before all the
standard docs are useless and tldp will just have to close
its doors!

I was at the xine site the other day. They no longer offer
technical support but refer users to their distros.

Tom

--
calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

Tom Newton wrote:
> On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Tom Newton wrote:
>> | On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> | Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
>> | problem.
>>
>> I thought the same thing, until I fired up my Ubuntu-powered
>> laptop to take a look. <ctrl><alt><f1> /did/ take me to a
>> prompt, though, so something isn't entirely right in the OP's
>> setup.
>>
>> While your suggestion would work on most other distros, it
>> appears that Ubuntu doesn't use the /etc/inittab at all.
>> Instead, it uses scripts in the /etc/event.d directory to
>> manage the process. The OP should check that the scripts
>> /etc/event.d/tty[1-6] exist, and contain the requisite ~ exec
>> /sbin/getty 38400 tty? line, along with the rest of the wrapper
>> script.
>
> Thanks for that, Lew.
>
> The above changes that Ubuntu has made bother me. It's like a
> car manufacturer altering a standard part with a tried and true
> design just to force its customers to buy only its parts.

Well, that standard part has some serious flaws. If Dan Bernstein's layout and
licensing hadn't been insane, for years, I'd suggest most systems use his
daemontools, because they solve the inittab configuration problem in similar
ways. This kind of switchover occurred years ago with changing /etc/inetd.conf
to /etc/xinetd.d/, and some folks didn't like it, but the new layout was
seriously superior.

> In this case, to phone only its technical support people...
>
> I will not be recommending Ubuntu to anyone in the future.
>
>> FWIW, Canonical replaced the usual init(8) with one of their
>> own; telinit (which is a hardlink to init) returns ~ telininit
>> (upstart 0.3.8) ~ Copyright (C) 2007 Canonical Ltd. when I
>> execute "telinit --version" on my Ubuntu system.
>
> Arrrggggghh! Effing Business is turning Linux into a tower
> of babel. At this rate it won't be long before all the
> standard docs are useless and tldp will just have to close
> its doors!

Oh, I wouldn't worry about that one. It's certainly not unusual to tweak the
copyright notices for stuff you modify and rebundle. As long as they publish
it under GPL or similar licensing, I see no issue there.

> I was at the xine site the other day. They no longer offer
> technical support but refer users to their distros.
>
> Tom
>

Now that's interesting.

On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom Newton wrote:
>> On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Tom Newton wrote:
>>> | On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> | Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
>>> | problem.
>>>
>>> I thought the same thing, until I fired up my Ubuntu-powered
>>> laptop to take a look. <ctrl><alt><f1> /did/ take me to a
>>> prompt, though, so something isn't entirely right in the OP's
>>> setup.
>>>
>>> While your suggestion would work on most other distros, it
>>> appears that Ubuntu doesn't use the /etc/inittab at all.
>>> Instead, it uses scripts in the /etc/event.d directory to
>>> manage the process. The OP should check that the scripts
>>> /etc/event.d/tty[1-6] exist, and contain the requisite ~ exec
>>> /sbin/getty 38400 tty? line, along with the rest of the wrapper
>>> script.
>>
>> Thanks for that, Lew.
>>
>> The above changes that Ubuntu has made bother me. It's like a
>> car manufacturer altering a standard part with a tried and true
>> design just to force its customers to buy only its parts.
>
> Well, that standard part has some serious flaws. If Dan Bernstein's layout and
> licensing hadn't been insane, for years, I'd suggest most systems use his
> daemontools, because they solve the inittab configuration problem in similar
> ways. This kind of switchover occurred years ago with changing /etc/inetd.conf
> to /etc/xinetd.d/, and some folks didn't like it, but the new layout was
> seriously superior.
>
>> In this case, to phone only its technical support people...
>>
>> I will not be recommending Ubuntu to anyone in the future.
>>
>>> FWIW, Canonical replaced the usual init(8) with one of their
>>> own; telinit (which is a hardlink to init) returns ~ telininit
>>> (upstart 0.3.8) ~ Copyright (C) 2007 Canonical Ltd. when I
>>> execute "telinit --version" on my Ubuntu system.
>>
>> Arrrggggghh! Effing Business is turning Linux into a tower
>> of babel. At this rate it won't be long before all the
>> standard docs are useless and tldp will just have to close
>> its doors!
>
> Oh, I wouldn't worry about that one. It's certainly not unusual to tweak the
> copyright notices for stuff you modify and rebundle. As long as they publish
> it under GPL or similar licensing, I see no issue there.
>
>> I was at the xine site the other day. They no longer offer
>> technical support but refer users to their distros.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>
> Now that's interesting.

And so is your article here. But I am still worried. Between
KDE/Gnome, etc., becoming the standard user interface, patched
kernels, and the above issues I referred to, as well as the
unnecessary proliferation of redundant scripting languages, Linux
_is_ becoming a "tower of babel".

I don't suppose there's any chance you know how to bring up a
full editor on the current commandline in bash's vi editing
mode...? I've gone through the readline manual with a fine tooth
comb. ^X-^E is supposed to work, but doesn't.

And while I'm off the wall, here's a very useful thing I picked
up a while back. Making your prompt bold so that it's easy to
pick it out of other text on the screen. For your /etc/profile or
~/.profile or ~/.bashrc.

(I run slack so I don't know what the system configuration file
for bash is in the other distros.)

export PS1='ESC[1m\u@\h:\w\$ESC[0m'

The "ESC" is made with vi-type editors with:

Ctrl-v-[

Don't know how it's done with other editors.

You can put whatever standard prompt elements between the ANSI
escape sequences (ESC[1m and ESC[0m (begin bold and end bold))
you want. See man bash.

Tom

--
calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

Tom Newton wrote:
> On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Tom Newton wrote:
>>> On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Tom Newton wrote:
>>>> | On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> | Hopefully, editing /etc/inittab and rebooting will solve your
>>>> | problem.
>>>>
>>>> I thought the same thing, until I fired up my Ubuntu-powered
>>>> laptop to take a look. <ctrl><alt><f1> /did/ take me to a
>>>> prompt, though, so something isn't entirely right in the OP's
>>>> setup.
>>>>
>>>> While your suggestion would work on most other distros, it
>>>> appears that Ubuntu doesn't use the /etc/inittab at all.
>>>> Instead, it uses scripts in the /etc/event.d directory to
>>>> manage the process. The OP should check that the scripts
>>>> /etc/event.d/tty[1-6] exist, and contain the requisite ~ exec
>>>> /sbin/getty 38400 tty? line, along with the rest of the wrapper
>>>> script.
>>> Thanks for that, Lew.
>>>
>>> The above changes that Ubuntu has made bother me. It's like a
>>> car manufacturer altering a standard part with a tried and true
>>> design just to force its customers to buy only its parts.
>> Well, that standard part has some serious flaws. If Dan Bernstein's layout and
>> licensing hadn't been insane, for years, I'd suggest most systems use his
>> daemontools, because they solve the inittab configuration problem in similar
>> ways. This kind of switchover occurred years ago with changing /etc/inetd.conf
>> to /etc/xinetd.d/, and some folks didn't like it, but the new layout was
>> seriously superior.
>>
>>> In this case, to phone only its technical support people...
>>>
>>> I will not be recommending Ubuntu to anyone in the future.
>>>
>>>> FWIW, Canonical replaced the usual init(8) with one of their
>>>> own; telinit (which is a hardlink to init) returns ~ telininit
>>>> (upstart 0.3.8) ~ Copyright (C) 2007 Canonical Ltd. when I
>>>> execute "telinit --version" on my Ubuntu system.
>>> Arrrggggghh! Effing Business is turning Linux into a tower
>>> of babel. At this rate it won't be long before all the
>>> standard docs are useless and tldp will just have to close
>>> its doors!
>> Oh, I wouldn't worry about that one. It's certainly not unusual to tweak the
>> copyright notices for stuff you modify and rebundle. As long as they publish
>> it under GPL or similar licensing, I see no issue there.
>>
>>> I was at the xine site the other day. They no longer offer
>>> technical support but refer users to their distros.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>> Now that's interesting.
>
> And so is your article here. But I am still worried. Between
> KDE/Gnome, etc., becoming the standard user interface, patched
> kernels, and the above issues I referred to, as well as the
> unnecessary proliferation of redundant scripting languages, Linux
> _is_ becoming a "tower of babel".

Well, yes. Welcome to Linux: check your expectation of overall consistency at
the door.

> I don't suppose there's any chance you know how to bring up a
> full editor on the current commandline in bash's vi editing
> mode...? I've gone through the readline manual with a fine tooth
> comb. ^X-^E is supposed to work, but doesn't.

Heh. No idea, I'm an Emacs user from way, way, way back before it was popular.

> And while I'm off the wall, here's a very useful thing I picked
> up a while back. Making your prompt bold so that it's easy to
> pick it out of other text on the screen. For your /etc/profile or
> ~/.profile or ~/.bashrc.
>
> (I run slack so I don't know what the system configuration file
> for bash is in the other distros.)
>
> export PS1='ESC[1m\u@\h:\w\$ESC[0m'

Where such settings go is a religious argument, and a long-term nasty. I like
setting them up for all users by dropping files in /etc/profile.d/.

On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom Newton wrote:
>> On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Tom Newton wrote:
>>>> On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Tom Newton wrote:
>>>>> | On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
<snip>
>>> Now that's interesting.
>>
>> And so is your article here. But I am still worried. Between
>> KDE/Gnome, etc., becoming the standard user interface, patched
>> kernels, and the above issues I referred to, as well as the
>> unnecessary proliferation of redundant scripting languages, Linux
>> _is_ becoming a "tower of babel".
>
> Well, yes. Welcome to Linux: check your expectation of overall consistency at
> the door.

It would be best, in my not-so-humble opinion, if there was standardization
in the base systems. Let the variations exist in the superficials.

I guess the FSHS is obsolete now, or will be soon :-(

>
>> I don't suppose there's any chance you know how to bring up a
>> full editor on the current commandline in bash's vi editing
>> mode...? I've gone through the readline manual with a fine tooth
>> comb. ^X-^E is supposed to work, but doesn't.
>
> Heh. No idea, I'm an Emacs user from way, way, way back before it was popular.

The dread Emacs!

The editor (there really is still one in there somewhere, I am told) from
the satanic forges of the evil dwarves of Mordor.

:-)

This is about ed, but ed is a precursor of vi, and it's very funny. I'm
sure you've seen it:

http://dreamcode.org/

The references to emacs are right on....

;-)

To the newbies: If you have never tried to use ed before, before
checking out that site above, go to an xterm or the like and
bring up a file in ed:

ed <filename>

Then you'll understand the webpage.

ROTFLMAO!


>
>> And while I'm off the wall, here's a very useful thing I picked
>> up a while back. Making your prompt bold so that it's easy to
>> pick it out of other text on the screen. For your /etc/profile or
>> ~/.profile or ~/.bashrc.
>>
>> (I run slack so I don't know what the system configuration file
>> for bash is in the other distros.)
>>
>> export PS1='ESC[1m\u@\h:\w\$ESC[0m'
>
> Where such settings go is a religious argument, and a long-term nasty.

Like the eternal war between vi and emacs?

ROTFL

> I like setting them up for all users by dropping files in
> /etc/profile.d/.

Is that universal (or something like it)? Got it here in slack.

Tom

--
calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

On Mar 1, 7:33 am, Tom Newton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tom Newton wrote:
> >> On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Tom Newton wrote:
> >>>> On 2008-02-29, Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> Tom Newton wrote:
> >>>>> | On 2008-02-29, zeno <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >>> Now that's interesting.
>
> >> And so is your article here. But I am still worried. Between
> >> KDE/Gnome, etc., becoming the standard user interface, patched
> >> kernels, and the above issues I referred to, as well as the
> >> unnecessary proliferation of redundant scripting languages, Linux
> >> _is_ becoming a "tower of babel".
>
> > Well, yes. Welcome to Linux: check your expectation of overall consistency at
> > the door.
>
> It would be best, in my not-so-humble opinion, if there was standardization
> in the base systems. Let the variations exist in the superficials.
>
> I guess the FSHS is obsolete now, or will be soon :-(
>
>
>
> >> I don't suppose there's any chance you know how to bring up a
> >> full editor on the current commandline in bash's vi editing
> >> mode...? I've gone through the readline manual with a fine tooth
> >> comb. ^X-^E is supposed to work, but doesn't.
>
> > Heh. No idea, I'm an Emacs user from way, way, way back before it was popular.
>
> The dread Emacs!
>
> The editor (there really is still one in there somewhere, I am told) from
> the satanic forges of the evil dwarves of Mordor.
>
> :-)
>
> This is about ed, but ed is a precursor of vi, and it's very funny. I'm
> sure you've seen it:
>
> http://dreamcode.org/
>
> The references to emacs are right on....
>
> ;-)
>
> To the newbies: If you have never tried to use ed before, before
> checking out that site above, go to an xterm or the like and
> bring up a file in ed:
>
> ed <filename>
>
> Then you'll understand the webpage.
>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
>
>
> >> And while I'm off the wall, here's a very useful thing I picked
> >> up a while back. Making your prompt bold so that it's easy to
> >> pick it out of other text on the screen. For your /etc/profile or
> >> ~/.profile or ~/.bashrc.
>
> >> (I run slack so I don't know what the system configuration file
> >> for bash is in the other distros.)
>
> >> export PS1='ESC[1m\u@\h:\w\$ESC[0m'
>
> > Where such settings go is a religious argument, and a long-term nasty.
>
> Like the eternal war between vi and emacs?
>
> ROTFL
>
> > I like setting them up for all users by dropping files in
> > /etc/profile.d/.
>
> Is that universal (or something like it)? Got it here in slack.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
> gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

Gee Whillikers! If there were any doubt about Babel being spawned by
misguided geeks, the flurry of responses to my query does give it
substance. I will look through some of the files mentioned to see
what I can find and report back. Since few of us Linux users are
'Experts', I believe it's important to be very careful and considerate
and detailed when making suggestions. I'm using Ubuntu because it's
fairly simple and even has some resemblance to Winduhs which I dislike
because its deliberately deceptive and confusing for obvious reasons:
keeping their secrets. Previously I used CLI with RedHat and it
seemed pretty straightforward. It is necessary for me to have a
graphic capability though since I am a visual artist and the Gnome
desktop (including GIMP) is a blessing. What consensus is there about
using Debian instead of Ubuntu? Or what about Slackware, given my
needs? Any simple statements (for my simple mind) would be
appreciated.
And thanks to everyone who contributed their comments, complex or
simple.

Geoffrey

Geoffrey writes:
> What consensus is there about using Debian instead of Ubuntu?

Stick with Ubuntu.
--
John Hasler
[email protected]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA