On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 18:18:58 +1000, Da Rock
wrote:
> Thats what I love about FBSD- the documentation is better than any other
> system out there, in the handbook but the man pages are the most
> comprehensive.
Fully agree. As a developer, I like to simply "man whatever"
to find out more about
On 03/19/11 17:18, Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 22:36:41 +0100, Michel Talon wrote:
How many new features of FreeBSD are
correctly documented presently?
Features of the FreeBSD OS are typically well documented.
This high quality affects all kind of documentation, be
it the h
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 22:36:41 +0100, Michel Talon wrote:
> How many new features of FreeBSD are
> correctly documented presently?
Features of the FreeBSD OS are typically well documented.
This high quality affects all kind of documentation, be
it the handbook & FAQ, as well as the manpages that a
ad? Just sayin'
- Original Message -
From: Chad Perrin [mailto:per...@apotheon.com]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 06:13 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: HAL must die!
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:36:41PM +0100, Michel Talon wrote:
> Chad wrote:
> >
> > Everybody
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:36:41PM +0100, Michel Talon wrote:
> Chad wrote:
> >
> > Everybody who thinks it's a good idea (by way of analogy) to write
> > command line utilities that default to not letting you specify any
> > options at all, and if you use one option to do something non-default
> >
The other two people whose responses to you I have read so far make some
good points. Nonetheless, I intend to give my take on the matter as
well.
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 09:03:54AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
>
> Chad, you are an intelligent individual. I have no doubt of that.
> However, I think you
Chad wrote:
> Everybody who thinks it's a good idea (by way of analogy) to write
> command line utilities that default to not letting you specify any
> options at all, and if you use one option to do something non-default
> you
> have to specify *all* options even when the specification is exactly
On 03/18/11 23:03, Jerry wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:26:57 -0600
Chad Perrin articulated:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:48:58PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:36:37 -0600
Chad Perrin articulated:
No, not really. It's more the fault of the hardware manufacturer.
Jerry,
allow me to add something to your statements.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:03:54 -0400, Jerry wrote:
> Chad, you are an intelligent individual. I have no doubt of that.
> However, I think you have failed to think your entire "hardware
> manufacturers are evil for not supporting brand X" operati
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:26:57 -0600
Chad Perrin articulated:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:48:58PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:36:37 -0600
> > Chad Perrin articulated:
> > >
> > > No, not really. It's more the fault of the hardware manufacturer.
> >
> > Chad, up until this po
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 08:27:32PM -0400, Daniel Staal wrote:
>
> The additional knowledge that Linux supports them means the manufacturer
> isn't totally closed to supporting Open-source software, but tells us
> nothing beyond that. Linux's support may be by way of a binary blob from
> Linksy
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:48:58PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:36:37 -0600
> Chad Perrin articulated:
> >
> > No, not really. It's more the fault of the hardware manufacturer.
>
> Chad, up until this point I had taken your response seriously. In fact,
> I thought it was well pr
--As of March 17, 2011 7:48:58 PM -0400, Jerry is alleged to have said:
>
> I have two Linksys Wireless-N PCI cards in front of me that work
> fine on a Windows platform. FreeBSD doesn't even have a driver for
> them, thereby rendering them useless. I suppose that is Microsoft's
> fault too.
No
On 03/18/11 03:35, David Brodbeck wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Da Rock
wrote:
The problem is it'd have to be someone who's unemployed. ;) Any
software company is going to want to patent something that valuable;
they'd be failing their shareholders if they didn't.
Exce
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:36:37 -0600
Chad Perrin articulated:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 05:35:57PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:48:52 -0600
> > Chad Perrin articulated:
> >
> > > I blame Microsoft, GNU, and Canonical for this trend, mostly.
> >
> > Chad, I believe I stand on fi
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 05:35:57PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:48:52 -0600
> Chad Perrin articulated:
>
> > I blame Microsoft, GNU, and Canonical for this trend, mostly.
>
> Chad, I believe I stand on firm ground when I state that you would
> blame Microsoft if the sun didn't co
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:48:52 -0600
Chad Perrin articulated:
> I blame Microsoft, GNU, and Canonical for this trend, mostly.
Chad, I believe I stand on firm ground when I state that you would
blame Microsoft if the sun didn't come up tomorrow. You obviously must
have a life time membership to "Sl
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Chad Perrin wrote:
In my experience, about one third of the time HAL makes X work great, and
the other two thirds of the time it fails in some way that requires me to
create a complete xorg.conf file just for one or two options.
hal just provides input device hotplug abili
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:46:50AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
> Quoth David Brodbeck on Thursday, 17 March 2011:
> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Da Rock
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Except a private company.
> >
> > Yeah, but most private software companies are trying to get bought
> > out by one
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 05:35:04PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
> Well yes, that's one thing: if you use HAL, everything must use HAL
> and you can't pick and match incompatible applications and force half
> of the things in xorg.conf.
There should be a way to override it on a piecemeal basis. Ser
Quoth David Brodbeck on Thursday, 17 March 2011:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Da Rock
> wrote:
> >> The problem is it'd have to be someone who's unemployed. ;) Any
> >> software company is going to want to patent something that valuable;
> >> they'd be failing their shareholders if they did
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Da Rock
wrote:
>> The problem is it'd have to be someone who's unemployed. ;) Any
>> software company is going to want to patent something that valuable;
>> they'd be failing their shareholders if they didn't.
>>
>
> Except a private company.
Yeah, but most priv
On 17 March 2011 16:10, Lars Eighner wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Krutov Mikle wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:32:59PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off
in
p
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:42:00 +0300, Krutov Mikle
wrote:
> As for me, it is like a habit:
> I've installed Xorg + HAL for the first time;
> I've seen that my config is ignored;
> I disabled HAL by-default in make.conf
> :)
Similar situation here. The thing that annoys me most
regarding HAL is tha
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Krutov Mikle wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:32:59PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
defaul
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:32:59PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
> >Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
> >ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
> >default?
> >
> >Is there a (convenient) w
On 03/17/11 01:27, Chip Camden wrote:
Quoth Jerry on Wednesday, 16 March 2011:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:29:25 +
Matthew Seaman articulated:
On 16/03/2011 00:37, Jerry wrote:
Microsoft has approximately 90% of the desktop market share with
everyone else dividing up the rem
On 03/17/11 04:38, David Brodbeck wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
It's certainly true that video is a bit of a "sticky widget" with regard
to open standards. The moment someone develops something that is
verifiably free of patent encumbrances for video and doesn
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> It's certainly true that video is a bit of a "sticky widget" with regard
> to open standards. The moment someone develops something that is
> verifiably free of patent encumbrances for video and doesn't just *suck*,
> I expect that either it
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:12:09AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > The largest possible paying audience is generally everybody capable of
> > using an open standard.
>
> Since we're talking about video, though, it's worth noting that there
>
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> The largest possible paying audience is generally everybody capable of
> using an open standard.
Since we're talking about video, though, it's worth noting that there
don't appear to *be* any truly open video compression standards.
They're *al
ound Windows easier to use
> and maneuver. I am a mouse person myself so I would not be able to
> comment on that even if I used a MAC.
. . . and yet, a majority of those people would probably extol the
virtues of the mouse if I introduced them to vi. Funny how that works.
>
> I
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 09:25:59AM +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 March 2011 07:37:53 Jerry wrote:
> >
> > Now, as far as HAL goes, the fragmented open-source community cannot
> > even begin to agree on its replacement. Every distro is busy trying to
>
> It looks like a bunch of l
Quoth Jerry on Wednesday, 16 March 2011:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:29:25 +
> Matthew Seaman articulated:
>
> > On 16/03/2011 00:37, Jerry wrote:
> > > Microsoft has approximately 90% of the desktop market share with
> > > everyone else dividing up the remainder. If you are on a Microsoft
> > >
Quoth Robert Huff on Wednesday, 16 March 2011:
> Erich Dollansky writes:
>
> > > The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
> > > choose from.
> >
> > when it comes to screwing, we use - at least outside the USA -
> > metric screws. M3, M4 ... M10 ...
> >
> > We
aneuver. I am a mouse person myself so I would not be able to
comment on that even if I used a MAC.
In any case, the subject declaring "HAL must die" if no longer
relevant. It is all ready dead, except on FreeBSD. Even its author has
declared it so. The real question is how long
ows easier to use
and maneuver. I am a mouse person myself so I would not be able to
comment on that even if I used a MAC.
In any case, the subject declaring "HAL must die" if no longer
relevant. It is all ready dead, except on FreeBSD. Even its author has
declared it so. The real questi
On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:29 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> Microsoft may once have had 90% of the desktop market -- but is that
> still true? Macs seem to be everywhere nowadays.
It may have change a couple of percentage points. Apple marketshare has gone
up a lot percentage wise but in the who
On 16/03/2011 00:37, Jerry wrote:
> Microsoft has approximately 90% of the desktop market share with
> everyone else dividing up the remainder. If you are on a Microsoft
> platform you use their products. The same applies to other platforms
> and their utilities.
Microsoft may once have had 90% of
On 03/16/11 10:43, Chad Perrin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 08:37:53PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
choose from.
. . . and most of them are supported on any given platform that isn't
pathologically closed.
Microsoft h
Erich Dollansky writes:
> > The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
> > choose from.
>
> when it comes to screwing, we use - at least outside the USA -
> metric screws. M3, M4 ... M10 ...
>
> We do not care much who manufactured them.
>
> The software indu
Hi,
On Wednesday 16 March 2011 07:37:53 Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 08:32:01 +1000
> Da Rock articulated:
>
> > On 03/08/11 03:00, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 07:31:43AM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
> > >
>
> The nice thing about standards is that there are so man
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, Jerry wrote:
Now, as far as HAL goes, the fragmented open-source community cannot
even begin to agree on its replacement. Every distro is busy trying to
reinvent the wheel. Here you want the majority of users to be dictated
to by a minority of users who cannot even agree on
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 08:37:53PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
>
> The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
> choose from.
. . . and most of them are supported on any given platform that isn't
pathologically closed.
>
> Microsoft has approximately 90% of the desktop market s
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 08:32:01 +1000
Da Rock articulated:
> On 03/08/11 03:00, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 07:31:43AM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry I could not help but to realize the title of this forum
> >> discussion.
> >>
> >> "I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that
On 03/08/11 03:00, Chad Perrin wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 07:31:43AM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
Sorry I could not help but to realize the title of this forum discussion.
"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that." :-/
"I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
(full quote)
ht
On Mar 7, 2011, at 9:28 PM, Svein Skogen (Listmail account) wrote:
> But he does raise a valid problem (if more than zero users, etc). "We"
> (I include fellow FreeBSD users, but also OSX and Linux users) do lack a
> decent cross-platform device manager stack, with uniform device name
> enumeration
On 08.03.2011 04:36, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 7 March 2011 19:44, Lars Eighner wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off
in
ports that I install or upgra
On 7 March 2011 19:44, Lars Eighner wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
>>>
>>> Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off
>>> in
>>> ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
>>> def
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
default?
Is there a (convenient) way to list ports that might pull in
I think now we know the real reason HAL was deprecated -- too many
crusty old jokes.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:17:23AM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
> On Mon 07 Mar 2011 at 09:00:14 PST Chad Perrin wrote:
> >
> >Did you know you can configure YouTube to use HTML5 instead of Flash
> >now? Adobe is in danger of becoming irrelevant.
>
> Meh. I never watch videos on the website anyw
On Mon 07 Mar 2011 at 09:00:14 PST Chad Perrin wrote:
Did you know you can configure YouTube to use HTML5 instead of Flash
now? Adobe is in danger of becoming irrelevant.
Meh. I never watch videos on the website anyway.
I download them with cclive, as mp4's.
Not sure what any of this ha
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 07:31:43AM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
> Sorry I could not help but to realize the title of this forum discussion.
>
> "I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that." :-/
"I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
(full quote)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnd-hdmgfk
Did
On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:32:59 -0600, Ivan Voras wrote:
Um, why exactly are so many people against HAL?
HAL is deprecated now. All projects using HAL are in the process or have
already migrated away from it. KDE has pluggable backends, so that's not a
big deal, but XFCE doesn't support anyt
Sorry I could not help but to realize the title of this forum discussion.
"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that." :-/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:32:59 +0100
Ivan Voras wrote:
> Um, why exactly are so many people against HAL? It's the only
> cross-platform thing available for non-Linux systems which handles
> device enumeration, hotplugs, etc.
I'm not, but I see that many Linux DEs abandon it (e.g latest Xfce),
s
On 06/03/2011 19:56, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
default?
Is there a (convenient) way to list ports that might pull in HAL without
having a configuration swit
On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, Lars Eighner wrote:
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
default?
Is there a (convenient) way to list ports that might pull in HAL without
having a configuration swi
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Lars Eighner wrote:
> Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
> ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
> default?
>
You can put WITHOUT_HAL=yes in /etc/make.conf
--
Eitan Adler
__
Using the -C switch with portupgrade, I am managing to turn WITH_HAL off in
ports that I install or upgrade. Is there a way to make this a global
default?
Is there a (convenient) way to list ports that might pull in HAL without
having a configuration switch?
--
Lars Eighner
http://www.larseighn
61 matches
Mail list logo
