Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:34:49 EST From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kaleb@x.org> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard drivers Message-ID: <199604111934.PAA10893@exalt.x.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:37:04 EST. <7382.829240624@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > As opposed to knowing cryptic options, commands, and whatnot in /etc/* > > in order to run UNIX? > > Well, two wrongs don't make a right. This kind of rhetoric just pegs my bullshit meter. > There are many who say that the > stuff in /etc should have a nice front-end tool to encapsulate edits, > and as much as many people hate AIX I've heard many good things about > SMIT. Hackers hate it, of course, but Joe User seems to like it quite > a bit. You're right. So what's your point? > > > Get off your high horse. xf86config that does exactly that. > > Sorry Kaleb, but xf86config is a creeping undead abortion from the > foulest pit of Hell. I guess XFree86 has the same sort of problem that FreeBSD does in getting people interested in writing essential utilities that don't have the glamor of hacking the kernel or the X server. > I would hardly want to hold it up as a shining > paragon of anything, except perhaps how to construct utterly unusable > interfaces using shell programming. You really should give a better > example to support your argument! I don't think the quality of implementation of xf86config is really relevant to this topic. The fact is that it's there. If you don't like it then I guess the burden is on you to write a better one and give it back to XFree86. > You're both right. So what's your point? The point is that some people seem to be ignorant about the features in the XFree86 server. Rather than allow disinformation to be spread I feel that it is incumbent upon me to correct factual errors when I see them and to try to educate people when they seem to be in need of additional information. Some have asserted that it's too much to ask people to change a line in their XF86Config file from "XkbSymbols us(pc101)" to "XkbSymbols us(pc101)+de" because that's "hacker meat." Frankly this rates as one of the more specious arguments I've ever heard. This isn't Micro$oft Windoze after all. In this particular case arguments like "it used to work" don't hold much water for me because a) 99% of the people who use X never see the console, b) 90% of the platforms I support don't have the feature at all, so from where I stand they haven't lost anything at all, and c) XKB is otherwise a big win because now all platforms, whether its a 16Mhz 386/SX running FreeBSD, a 300Mhz Digital AXP, or anything between and beyond, they all have the same basic mechanism for dealing with the keymaps. XKB is big move forward in a vendor neutral solution to this problem -- keep up or get left behind. All of that not withstanding, there are relatively simple answers to the questions that were asked, but that wasn't good enough for Soren and Joerg, who seem to want to hold XFree86 to a higher standard than they do even for their own endeavor. And so the flaming goes. They were even polite answers for the most part; but that wasn't good enough. If I can't be allowed to educate your core team, then perhaps I should let you flounder and figure it out on your own? The fact is that editing the XF86Config file is the way it's going to be until there's something better in the OS for the server to work with. I must say that it seems you have your work cut out for you. It must be very hard to develop good will when your core team flame people who are trying to be helpful. Before Soren and Joerg's barrage I had it in mind that I would do something about it, but my good will is rapidly evaporating. -- Kaleb KEITHLEY
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604111934.PAA10893>