On 23 September 2011 20:59, James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com wrote:
DS == Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org writes:
DS (Real summary: That's your opinion. The development team have ours.
Well, *some* of the development texm. Some of us agree that forcing the
dpi to 96 is a b0rked regression.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 23 September 2011 20:59, James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com wrote:
DS == Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org writes:
DS (Real summary: That's your opinion. The development team have ours.
Well, *some* of the development
On 24 September 2011 12:26, Corbin Simpson mostawesomed...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, it's time for me to speak up.
I sabotaged this entire effort. You see, five years ago, I had a
laptop with a brand-spanking-new Radeon X1650. Only fglrx was
available. fglrx used the actual screen DPI, causing
Twas brillig at 16:19:29 24.09.2011 UTC+02 when hramr...@centrum.cz did
gyre and gimble:
[..]
Oh, please fork the server already. And the mailing list as well.
--
http://fossarchy.blogspot.com/
pgpBRWdREkraA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 24 September 2011 16:29, Mikhail Gusarov dotted...@dottedmag.net wrote:
Twas brillig at 16:19:29 24.09.2011 UTC+02 when hramr...@centrum.cz did
gyre and gimble:
[..]
Oh, please fork the server already. And the
On 22 September 2011 19:34, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@oracle.com wrote:
On 09/22/11 08:32, Michal Suchanek wrote:
Hello,
Can anybody, please, explain how this bug[1] could have remained in
Xorg for two years assuming any sanity is remaining among Xorg
developers?
If we were sane,
Hi,
On 23 September 2011 15:58, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
There are obviously people sabotaging X already since the change went
in more than two years ago and stayed in spite of being pointed out as
bogus.
I think that your emails are bogus, and if you keep on sending them
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 22 September 2011 19:34, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@oracle.com wrote:
On 09/22/11 08:32, Michal Suchanek wrote:
Hello,
Can anybody, please, explain how this bug[1] could have remained in
Xorg for two
DS == Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org writes:
DS (Real summary: That's your opinion. The development team have ours.
Well, *some* of the development texm. Some of us agree that forcing the
dpi to 96 is a b0rked regression. It is just that those with the contrary
opinion are more vocal and
Hello,
Can anybody, please, explain how this bug[1] could have remained in
Xorg for two years assuming any sanity is remaining among Xorg
developers?
Thanks
Michal
[1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23705
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org:
On 09/22/11 08:32, Michal Suchanek wrote:
Hello,
Can anybody, please, explain how this bug[1] could have remained in
Xorg for two years assuming any sanity is remaining among Xorg
developers?
If we were sane, we wouldn't still be working on X, especially not
after people pile on abuse for
11 matches
Mail list logo
