xorg-x11-server/xorg-x11-server-1.1.1-vt-activate-is-a-terrible-api.patch

--- xorg-server-1.1.1/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_init.c.vt-activate	2006-07-05 14:31:41.000000000 -0400
+++ xorg-server-1.1.1/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_init.c	2006-12-14 22:00:25.000000000 -0500
@@ -248,14 +248,20 @@
 #endif
 	    /*
 	     * now get the VT
+	     *
+	     * There's a race here, in that if someone else does a VT_ACTIVATE
+	     * between our ACTIVATE/WAITACTIVE, we might never get the VT.
+	     * So we have to fail in that case.  There's really no fixing this,
+	     * it's a racy protocol.
 	     */
 	    if (ioctl(xf86Info.consoleFd, VT_ACTIVATE, xf86Info.vtno) < 0)
-	        xf86Msg(X_WARNING, "xf86OpenConsole: VT_ACTIVATE failed: %s\n",
-		        strerror(errno));
+		FatalError("xf86OpenConsole: VT_ACTIVATE failed: %s\n",
+			   strerror(errno));
+
 
 	    if (ioctl(xf86Info.consoleFd, VT_WAITACTIVE, xf86Info.vtno) < 0)
-	        xf86Msg(X_WARNING, "xf86OpenConsole: VT_WAITACTIVE failed: %s\n",
-		    strerror(errno));
+		FatalError("xf86OpenConsole: VT_WAITACTIVE failed: %s\n",
+			   strerror(errno));
 
 	    if (ioctl(xf86Info.consoleFd, VT_GETMODE, &VT) < 0)
 	        FatalError("xf86OpenConsole: VT_GETMODE failed %s\n",
@@ -352,6 +358,9 @@
 	    if (ioctl(xf86Info.consoleFd, VT_ACTIVATE, activeVT) < 0)
 	        xf86Msg(X_WARNING, "xf86CloseConsole: VT_ACTIVATE failed: %s\n",
 		        strerror(errno));
+	    if (ioctl(xf86Info.consoleFd, VT_WAITACTIVE, activeVT) < 0)
+	        xf86Msg(X_WARNING, "xf86CloseConsole: VT_WAITACTIVE failed: %s\n",
+		        strerror(errno));
 	    activeVT = -1;
         }