- Original Message
From: pk pete...@coolmail.se
BRM wrote:
The point of the UI is that you ought not care what goes where, unless you
are
debugging the UI or the program itself.
While a UI is important; a good UI is key.
And a plain text editor is, imo, a good UI; everybody
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Another layer can be good, if properly abstracted. A good example is KDE's
popups when you plug in a hotswap storage device. You get a context-sensitive
popup asking you what you want to do and the choices are sane. You say what
you want to do and don't worry about the
- Original Message
From: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 22:36:45 BRM wrote:
Or a pretty GUI with clicky boxes to change the settings while never
letting the user see the contents of the XML.
Once the user interface is in place it doesn't matter
BRM wrote:
The point of the UI is that you ought not care what goes where, unless you
are debugging the UI or the program itself.
While a UI is important; a good UI is key.
And a plain text editor is, imo, a good UI; everybody knows how to use
it. Why bring in another extra (translation)
On Wednesday 20 January 2010 21:01:47 pk wrote:
BRM wrote:
The point of the UI is that you ought not care what goes where, unless
you are debugging the UI or the program itself.
While a UI is important; a good UI is key.
And a plain text editor is, imo, a good UI; everybody knows how
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:21:18 -0600, Dale wrote:
Even easier, hit e at the GRUB menu and add gentoo=nox to the kernel
options.
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote down
here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a normal
startup
Stroller wrote:
On 18 Jan 2010, at 21:50, James Ausmus wrote:
Very recent buyers of Lenovo laptops don't even *have* a SysRq key
anymore. I
reckon it won't be long before other makers follow suit. I can see
Lenovo's
point: there's probably less than 10,000 people in the whole world
that ever
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:21:18 -0600, Dale wrote:
Even easier, hit e at the GRUB menu and add gentoo=nox to the kernel
options.
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote down
here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything,
Iain Buchanan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 18:23 -0600, Dale wrote:
Iain Buchanan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 23:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 09:03:57 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:21:18 -0600, Dale wrote:
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote down
here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a normal
startup of everything but xdm.
Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 09:03:57 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:21:18 -0600, Dale wrote:
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote down
here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:12:11 -0600, Dale wrote:
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote
down here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a normal
startup of everything but xdm. Single mode has its uses but it's a bit
of a
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:55:20 +, Peter Humphrey wrote:
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a normal
startup of everything but xdm. Single mode has its uses but it's a bit
of a sledgehammer for this particular nut.
Each of my machines has a no-x run level, which
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:09:37 -0600, Dale wrote:
I hope some manufacturers don't shoot themselves in the foot while
removing keys. o_O
They'd have to be using a pretty extreme method of key removal for that
to be a risk :P
--
Neil Bothwick
Always proofread carefully to see if you any
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:12:11 -0600, Dale wrote:
I usually just do softlevel=single or that other one I got wrote
down here somewhere.
That turns off almost everything, whereas gentoo=nox does a normal
startup of everything but xdm. Single mode has its
Stroller wrote:
Of course, I use Gentoo on my headless servers, so I am glad that server
software - Dovecot or Courier for IMAP, Apache, Samba - all have
plain-text configuration files I can edit with vim (which I have been
learning to utilise better recently). But even if these switched to
- Original Message
From: Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:09:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
XML is a machine-readable file format that just happens to use ASCII
characters, it is not meant to be modified by a text editor, so if
your program uses XML
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 22:36:45 BRM wrote:
Or a pretty GUI with clicky boxes to change the settings while never
letting the user see the contents of the XML.
Once the user interface is in place it doesn't matter whether it is XML or
something else. The key is that is has a user
Alan McKinnon wrote:
The only way to be sure of that is to write your own replacement for HAL.
;)
That might not be a bad idea
I never agreed with the implementation of hal. An abstract layer sounds good,
but why must it abstract ALL hardware? Most software already knows what
Neil Walker wrote:
It seems xml is the fashion with certain programmers. Totally
unnecessary. :(
Be lucky,
Neil
http://www.neiljw.com
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
Dale
:-) :-)
On Monday 18 January 2010 12:10:59 Dale wrote:
Neil Walker wrote:
It seems xml is the fashion with certain programmers. Totally
unnecessary. :(
Be lucky,
Neil
http://www.neiljw.com
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 12:10:59 Dale wrote:
Neil Walker wrote:
It seems xml is the fashion with certain programmers. Totally
unnecessary. :(
Be lucky,
Neil
http://www.neiljw.com
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:59:07 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Most devices fall into one of two groups: storage and I/O.
Auto-mounters do not care about your keyboard, whereas X needs to know
about your monitor, card, keyboard, mouse. Why does hal try and
abstract both? Seems silly to me.
On the
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:14 PM, pk pete...@coolmail.se wrote:
Btw, devicekit has been renamed to udisks.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Nzc2NA
The whole of DeviceKit was not renamed, just the DeviceKit-disks
program was renamed to udisks.
And yes I think it all uses XML
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 04:10:59AM -0600, Dale wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
XML is handy for nested configuration, where various options apply to
specific subsets of other configuration items. I could
Dale wrote:
Stop lurking and just join me. lol
... Darth Vader: Luke, join me and I will complete your training...
;-)
Best regards
Peter K
Paul Hartman wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:14 PM, pk pete...@coolmail.se wrote:
Btw, devicekit has been renamed to udisks.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Nzc2NA
The whole of DeviceKit was not renamed, just the DeviceKit-disks
program was renamed to udisks.
And
On 1/18/2010 5:10 AM, Dale wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
XML allows you to generate complex, structured, hierarchical data that
can be read, changed, and stored by well-tested third party libraries
that
On Monday 18 January 2010 18:26:21 Mike Edenfield wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
XML allows you to generate complex, structured, hierarchical data that
can be read, changed, and stored by well-tested
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 18:26:21 Mike Edenfield wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
XML allows you to generate complex, structured, hierarchical data that
can be read, changed,
Mike Edenfield wrote:
XML allows you to generate complex, structured, hierarchical data that
can be read, changed, and stored by well-tested third party libraries
that don't need to know anything about the contents or meaning of your
configuration data beforehand. This means I, as a
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 18:26:21 Mike Edenfield wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
XML allows you to generate
Paul Hartman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 18:26:21 Mike Edenfield wrote:
+1 I do OK with plain text but no clue on the new xml stuff. Why not
just keep it simple? Is xml REALLY needed?
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
That was my problem, no keyboard or mouse. Sort of hard to do much in that
situation.
Dale
Pshaw... ;)
ctrl-alt-F1, or, if that doesn't work:
alt-SysRq-R
alt-F1
Of course, method 2 only works if you have the Magic
James Ausmus wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com
mailto:rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
That was my problem, no keyboard or mouse. Sort of hard to do
much in that situation.
Dale
Pshaw... ;)
ctrl-alt-F1, or, if that doesn't work:
alt-SysRq-R
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
James Ausmus wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com mailto:
rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
That was my problem, no keyboard or mouse. Sort of hard to do
much in that situation.
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
that most people don't even know how to use SysRq keys. I didn't and
had to do a hard shutdown. I had to actually pull the plug to do any
good. Luckily I knew how to get it
On Monday 18 January 2010 23:04:56 James Ausmus wrote:
And this is why it is a Very Good Thing to spread the word about the Magic
SysRq keys. Did ctrl-alt-del not do anything, or a single press of
the power button (which should send an ACPI shutdown signal, causing the
system to
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.comwrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 23:04:56 James Ausmus wrote:
And this is why it is a Very Good Thing to spread the word about the
Magic
SysRq keys. Did ctrl-alt-del not do anything, or a single press of
the power
James Ausmus wrote:
I'll try to stop being a smart-ass, but it's just one of those kind of
days... grin
-James
I have those days too. They tend to come in bunches tho. ;-)
Dale
:-) :-)
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:50:36 -0800, James Ausmus wrote:
Very recent buyers of Lenovo laptops don't even *have* a SysRq key
anymore. I
reckon it won't be long before other makers follow suit. I can see
Lenovo's point: there's probably less than 10,000 people in the whole
world that ever
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:04:56 -0800, James Ausmus wrote:
Another option (I know - too late for you, but might be useful for
someone that runs across this on Google), is to press I during the
initscript processes - enters Interactive Boot mode, so you can Y/N
individual startup scripts,
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:53:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Your post makes sense until you realise that the use of XML in a
configuration designed to be changed by the user renders the package
virtually unusable. Given a choice between me as a developer struggling
with a config parser versus
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
that most people don't even know how to use SysRq keys. I didn't and
had to do a hard shutdown. I had to actually pull the plug to do any
good.
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 00:29:18 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:53:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Your post makes sense until you realise that the use of XML in a
configuration designed to be changed by the user renders the package
virtually unusable. Given a choice between
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 23:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
that most people don't even know how to use SysRq keys. I didn't and
had to do a hard shutdown. I had to actually
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:04:56 -0800, James Ausmus wrote:
Another option (I know - too late for you, but might be useful for
someone that runs across this on Google), is to press I during the
initscript processes - enters Interactive Boot mode, so you can Y/N
individual
Iain Buchanan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 23:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
that most people don't even know how to use SysRq keys. I didn't and
had to do a hard
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:09:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
XML is a machine-readable file format that just happens to use ASCII
characters, it is not meant to be modified by a text editor, so if
your program uses XML configuration files, it should include a means
of editing those files that
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 00:29:18 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:53:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Your post makes sense until you realise that the use of XML in a
configuration designed to be changed by the user renders the package
virtually
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 19 January 2010 00:29:18 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:53:16 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Your post makes sense until you realise that the use of XML in a
configuration
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 18:23 -0600, Dale wrote:
Iain Buchanan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 23:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Monday 18 January 2010 22:47:05 Dale wrote:
In that case, ctrl alt F1 does nothing. You also need to understand
that most people don't even know how
On 18 Jan 2010, at 21:50, James Ausmus wrote:
Very recent buyers of Lenovo laptops don't even *have* a SysRq key
anymore. I
reckon it won't be long before other makers follow suit. I can see
Lenovo's
point: there's probably less than 10,000 people in the whole world
that ever
used that key
On 18 Jan 2010, at 17:53, Alan McKinnon wrote:
...
XML allows you to generate complex, structured, hierarchical data
that
can be read, changed, and stored by well-tested third party libraries
that don't need to know anything about the contents or meaning of
your
configuration data
On 18 Jan 2010, at 23:09, Alan McKinnon wrote:
...
If we are truly trying to make Linux more accessible, with things
like
the plug and play hal offers, should we even be contemplating editing
config files?
XML is a machine-readable file format that just happens to use ASCII
characters, it
Alan McKinnon wrote:
As our resident hal-hater-in-charge, Dale will no doubt be *very* pleased to
hear of what Ubuntu is doing for 10.04:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
When I say *entirely*, that's what the blog said - entirely. If this pans out,
maybe there's a chance Dale
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 09:39:27AM -0600, Dale wrote:
From my understanding, isn't the same guy doing devicekit that did
hal? I'm not saying it won't be better because it should be. From what
I read a good while back, he learned a lot about the pitfalls of hal.
He, most likely, will
On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 17:27 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
As our resident hal-hater-in-charge, Dale will no doubt be *very* pleased to
hear of what Ubuntu is doing for 10.04:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
When I say *entirely*, that's what the blog said - entirely. If this
On Sunday 17 January 2010 18:18:36 Eray Aslan wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 09:39:27AM -0600, Dale wrote:
From my understanding, isn't the same guy doing devicekit that did
hal? I'm not saying it won't be better because it should be. From what
I read a good while back, he learned a lot
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
As our resident hal-hater-in-charge, Dale will no doubt be *very* pleased to
hear of what Ubuntu is doing for 10.04:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
It seems that DeviceKit is no help for the various bugs in hald that
prevent writng
Eray Aslan wrote:
It is usually done right in the third version. First one too small,
second one too big, third one just right :)
I think it is called Second System Effect
No, it's called Goldilocks and the Three Bears. ;)
Be lucky,
Neil
http://www.neiljw.com
Alan McKinnon wrote:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
Xorg is removing HAL support; as of xorg-server-1.8 HAL is no longer
used. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Nzc2Mw
Devicekit will not replace HAL entirely:
http://www.x.org/wiki/XorgHAL
Btw, devicekit has been
Joerg Schilling wrote:
how do we
prevent that DeviceKit will become the same desaster as hald?
The only way to be sure of that is to write your own replacement for HAL. ;)
Be lucky,
Neil
http://www.neiljw.com
On 17 Jan 2010, at 18:42, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
As our resident hal-hater-in-charge, Dale will no doubt be *very*
pleased to
hear of what Ubuntu is doing for 10.04:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
It seems that DeviceKit is no
Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
It seems that DeviceKit is no help for the various bugs in hald that
prevent writng CDs/DVDs/BluRays under certain circumstances.
I did write mail to the DeviceKit maintainer to no avail, ...
You probably didn't bitch him out thoroughly
pk wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
entirely removing hal in favour of DeviceKit.
Xorg is removing HAL support; as of xorg-server-1.8 HAL is no longer
used. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Nzc2Mw
Devicekit will not replace HAL entirely:
http://www.x.org/wiki/XorgHAL
On Sunday 17 January 2010 22:14:06 Neil Walker wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
how do we
prevent that DeviceKit will become the same desaster as hald?
The only way to be sure of that is to write your own replacement for HAL.
;)
That might not be a bad idea
I never agreed with the
67 matches
Mail list logo
