Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 03:38:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: Piero Serini <piero@strider.ibenet.it> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, peter@nmti.com Subject: Re: Gritching about XFree86 and serial port naming Message-ID: <199508300138.DAA00296@strider.ibenet.it> In-Reply-To: <199508300107.LAA10577@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Aug 30, 95 11:07:16 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello. Quoting from Bruce Evans (Wed Aug 30 03:07:16 1995): > >Oh yeh, the docs should have something in big bold letters about linking > >/dev/mouse to /dev/cuaa0 under whatever name it ends up as... > > That would be bogus. X works with the vanilla POSIX port ttyd0 and > always has. I'd not say it's "bogus". Maybe it's redundant, or strictly speaking "unnececessary", but as I suggested on -install I think many many users would be really happy in seeing their X setup working by just typing in "/dev/mouse" in the pointer section, without havin to fiddle with this 'strange' (ok I know that for *you* is simple, but you're not Joe User) naming scheme. If install asked the user "which DOS 'com' port shall I use for the mouse (1/2/3/4) [1]? __", and linked /dev/mouse to the ap- propriate device, I bet a lot of people would find FreeBSD much more friendly in the first impression, which is the important one. And, we wouldn't read lots of e-mail about setting the mouse in X, and why Linux works right out of the install (this is the rea- son, anyway: it links /dev/mouse to the appropriate device), and why does this strange OS called U*ix use this strange numbering scheme starting with 0 while all other serious OSes like (may God forgive me :) DOS use 1 2 3 4 ... Bye, -- # $Id: .signature,v 1.12 1995/08/14 12:10:54 piero Exp $ Piero Serini Via Giambologna, 1 <Piero@Free.IT> I 20136 Milano - ITALY
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199508300138.DAA00296>