* Kenshi Muto [2004-07-26 22:00:22+0900] > At 26 Jul 04 11:35:32 GMT, > Recai Oktas wrote: [...] > > The difference mainly comes from the fact that each of the console > > handling packages mentioned above needs special treatment and we should > > leave this task to the most eligible developer, that is, the one who use > > that type of console in his/her real life. By this argument, I must say > > that the console-jfb should be maintained by a Japanese developer > > (Kenshi?). That way, such console problems could be quickly spotted > > and fixed. I think this fact also ensures the modularization when we > > consider it in d-i. > > I may misunderstand your opinion, but jfbterm is completely different > with console-data and console-cyrillic. > > - jfbterm is just terminal application as same as bterm. > It uses framebuffer and is independent of console-*. > Because this is application, > - normal-user can't launch up X Window System from here. > - it can't provide as console by init script.
I'm aware of some of these facts. But then isn't there a problem here which I'm going to try to explain? As for the current situation we try to introduce the end user with a _completely localized_ console (or a terminal wrt jfbterm) after the installation has finished (and without any extra effort to correct the localization problems -- #250789). I mean a barebones (but localized) environment, since he/she may prefer to install X Window System or other stuff later or may be contented with it (due to the, say, machine resources). As I understand you correctly, it seems that the jfbterm is merely considered as a wrapper to display second-stage messages in Japanese (or other relevant languages). Regarding the X Window launch up problem with jfbterm, I can't suggest a solution at the moment, but we could surely work on this issue. Regards, -- roktas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
