From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Dec 29 11:58:11 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA09759 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:58:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA09742 Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:58:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA04971; Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:57:55 -0800 To: "Amancio Hasty Jr." cc: sos@FreeBSD.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, jdli@linux.csie.nctu.edu.tw, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: syscons driver In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:39:22 PST." <199512291939.LAA01052@rah.star-gate.com> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:57:55 -0800 Message-ID: <4969.820267075@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > We *should* assume that Joe out on the Net has X capable HW . > If we have problems with *supported* X hardware then we should addressed > them and not say that we should not be emphasizing X capable apps. Sigh. I find the image of two separate arguments at a party where too much alcohol has been consumed coming to mind here. Amancio is in one corner, arguing violently with a potted plant about apps and how we should be writing them. The plant, as far as can be seen, is in complete agreement. Everyone else is in another other corner arguing about relying on X for critical-path applications, like the install. There's no unanimous agreement, but the general concensus seems to be "Oh, no, of course not X for an install! But SVGA / curses on the other hand! [much waving of hands and shouting about methods]" So, to score the evening's game so far, we have: Amancio vs Plant (apps): Win (by no contest) Everybody vs Everybody (installation widgets): Draw (still arguing) I hope this makes the last 3 days worth of debate clearer for those who have just joined us. Jordan