Thus spake David Laight ("DL> ") sometime Today...

DL> Then /dev/console could be made write-only - actually that may break too
DL> much :-(   However it could be stopped from being a ctty.
DL> This would also remove all the problems of the permissions on /dev/console.
DL> (I think, that if I login on the console, I can steal all the console messages!)

There's nothing wrong with console being a ctty, practically speaking.
The "steal all the console messages" is ludicrous.  Where'd that come
from?  Stuff that logs to the console is, in all probability, logging
someplace ELSE as well, so it wouldn't be lost...

Also, if /dev/console and /dev/syscons talk to the same endpoint
(which they will if they have the same major/minor.  Think about it...),
you're not gaining anything except, perhaps, the ability to open by
a different name.

Even the evil trinity of console/syscons/systty afforded only name
separation in reality -- Most times syscons/systty were hard-linked
to /dev/console.

I don't see the separation as enough of a win to justify the effort
needed to contemplate the amount of work required to consider
implementing it.

				--*greywolf;
--
NetBSD: Microsoft ask you where you want to go.  BSD gets you there.