From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 29 12:15:55 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA10943
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:15:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA10938
          Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:15:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost.v-site.net (localhost.v-site.net [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA01414; Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:15:37 -0800
Message-Id: <199512292015.MAA01414@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: rah.star-gate.com: Host localhost.v-site.net didn't use HELO protocol
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
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 11:57:55 PST."
             <4969.820267075@time.cdrom.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:15:37 -0800
From: "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>>> "Jordan K. Hubbard" said:
 > > 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.

Well my "drunken" view ( I hardly drink at all) is:

Nope, they are closely related . And it depends on what you want to do 
or how much effort you want to spend on some funky graphic API .

The thread on why people are not writing X apps  or whatever apps got 
deviated by the obvious exception of your sysintall which of course
we can drag into the discussion if you like.

If memory does not failed me , the why people don't write apps 
subject was first mentioned by Soren and he proposed yet another 
graphic API. Thats when I started jumping in . Furthermore, it is my
believe, Jordan, that you want to or wanted to de-emphasize X apps
due to: 

1)	X is hard to install
2)	X is hard to configure

And I think that the points have been answered at least to my satisfaction

May I kindly suggest that if we are going to carry a debate on whether
sysinstall should use X or some funky graphic API that we use a
different subject header ?

	Regards,
	Amancio