2008/4/2, Steven Presser <steve160@xxxxxxxxx>:
> I've read the entirety of section 7 of the FAQ and see
> nothing explicitly about the original topic. Yes, it is the
> right area of discussion, and yes there is something which
> is close to what the poster wants, but it does not perfectly
> match the question asked (section 7.8).
> What might seem obvious to you is not always obvious
> to the rest of the world. The original author stated s/he
> was fairly new to OpenBSD and s/he has "been searching
> since last week". Maybe, just maybe a weeks worth of
> searching would have involved the FAQ. Perhaps if you
> could offer a bit more clarity in your answer, it would help
> (for example section 7.x.y, and look at the zzzzzz
> command" would help this and future posters. I'm sure
> many people search the mailing lists when they don't quite
> understand something, and offering a full answer here could
> prevent future asking of the same question.
The (almost) full answer in already in the FAQ, section 7.8 as you
precised. I don't know why reposting it here would help. In fact,
it's much better to give pointers to the FAQ so the next person with a
question goes there and find his/her own answer.
> In addition, lowering the barrier to getting an answer to a
> legitimate (non-obvious) question would help in the adoption
> of OpenBSD. Imagine if every question was answered as
> you just answered this. People wouldn't adopt OpenBSD
> because it would be impossible to get help with any question.
Hate to say it, but most questions are answered the way I did it. And
I certainly wasn't the worst of the lot.
> Much as I hate to do this, I'm going to say look at Ubuntu.
> They have a community of people who write tutorials for
> others and help each other with problems. They didn't get there
> through snotty answers. Quality answers give new adopters a
> better experience, and the courage to come back and ask
> questions again. They then feel comfortable using OpenBSD
> in other places and recommending it to others. This spreads
> adoption. So you can see how giving quality answers might
> help everyone.
I think you can search the archives for references, but world
domination is not an official goal of OpenBSD. Heck, I'm not even
officially speaking for the project in any way. When I started
OpenBSD, I want to know a lot of things too. I read the FAQ, about a
hundred man pages, and some stuff on the internet. I even do this
> And I'll close with this: Merely offering a product with perfect
> security is no good if no one uses it. Part of the goal of
> OpenBSD should be to create a secure operating system and
> have it adopted in as many places as possible. Do your part for
> adoption: Give good answers to those who take the time to ask
> politely and type properly.
> PS: I believe Bergeron is referring to section 7.8 of the FAQ,
> which discusses setting wsons driver values to blank the
> console after inactivity.
I am in fact referring to that part. Maybe it is not a howto tutorial
on how to shut down your screen but it is certainly enough to see that
wscons achieves this functionality under OpenBSD.
If you set the timeout to something unreasonable, like 50 milliseconds
the screen should be off most of the time.
How do I know this? I tried, after re-reading the manpage and the FAQ
entry. But I don't want to commit myself to insuring this works on
the OP's computer. So I point to the docs.
At this point I consider the question answered, so I will refrain from