On 2009-07-18_06:54:21, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 18 03:22 -0500]:
> > On Thu,16.Jul.09, 07:13:08, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > > * Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 16 06:05 -0500]:
> > >
> > > > > does seem as though there is a strong sentiment against HAL from
> > > > > several use
* Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 18 03:22 -0500]:
> On Thu,16.Jul.09, 07:13:08, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > * Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 16 06:05 -0500]:
> >
> > > > does seem as though there is a strong sentiment against HAL from
> > > > several users. You might contact the Xorg developers and ask nicely
On Thu,16.Jul.09, 18:19:54, Dirk wrote:
>
> You suggest that everyone compiles X11 him-/herself now?
>
> To downgrade or to even switch whole distributions because of a
> single stubborn package maintainer?
>
> How about that package maintainer just turns a dependency back into
> a recommendatio
On Thu,16.Jul.09, 07:13:08, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 16 06:05 -0500]:
>
> > > does seem as though there is a strong sentiment against HAL from
> > > several users. You might contact the Xorg developers and ask nicely
> > > for them to remove the dependency.
> >
> > I do
On Thu,16.Jul.09, 18:29:31, Dirk wrote:
>
> I can imagine making Linux safer to use for beginners by having a
> daemon in the background running that overwrites changed config
> files with default values to prevent clueless people from trashing
> their system.
>
> That daemon could be enforced as
On Thu,16.Jul.09, 17:30:00, Dirk wrote:
>
> I start to wonder how much words and effort the actual package
> maintainers would use to avoid turning a dependency back into a
> recommendation when the users already have such a mindset.
Do you volunteer on triaging bugs like:
,[ fictious bug re
On Qui, 16 Jul 2009, Alex Samad wrote:
I am all for convenience, but I am also for the right to choose, sounds
like HAL is not really needed for X, so it should be a recommends and
not a depends.
I've read in this thread that X can work without HAL, but is it a
run-time choice or a compile-ti
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 08:28:36PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * Alex Samad [2009 Jul 16 19:40 -0500]:
> > I am all for convenience, but I am also for the right to choose, sounds
> > like HAL is not really needed for X, so it should be a recommends and
> > not a depends.
>
> I've played some wi
* Alex Samad [2009 Jul 16 19:40 -0500]:
> I am all for convenience, but I am also for the right to choose, sounds
> like HAL is not really needed for X, so it should be a recommends and
> not a depends.
I've played some with the new features of Xorg earlier this year,
xrandr. The HAL capability
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 06:16:51PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * Alex Samad [2009 Jul 16 17:46 -0500]:
> > HAL has been a pain for me, because of my laptop and my need to attach
> > things to the laptop whilst its on, thus hal mount things all over the
> > place and does things the system wasn't
* Alex Samad [2009 Jul 16 17:46 -0500]:
> HAL has been a pain for me, because of my laptop and my need to attach
> things to the laptop whilst its on, thus hal mount things all over the
> place and does things the system wasn't doing before.
I'm puzzled by this and HAL does not mount *anything*
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:02:19 +1000
Alex Samad wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:57:44PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 06:39:16 +1000
> > Alex Samad wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > > > This is just wrong; HAL *
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 14:02, Alex Samad wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:57:44PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 06:39:16 +1000
>> Alex Samad wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > > > > This is just wrong; HAL *doesn't automount
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:57:44PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 06:39:16 +1000
> Alex Samad wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > > This is just wrong; HAL *doesn't automount anything* on its own. It
> > > > > merely passes infor
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 06:39:16 +1000
Alex Samad wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
...
> > > > This is just wrong; HAL *doesn't automount anything* on its own. It
> > > > merely passes information to a *volume manager*, which can be configured
> > > > to do whateve
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:20:56 +0200
> Dirk wrote:
>
> > Celejar wrote:
> > > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:58:12 +0200
> > > Dirk wrote:
> > >
> > >> Avi Greenbury wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > >>> What is the 'best part of Linux' that HAL
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:35:29AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <4a5f532a.8000...@gmx.net>, Dirk wrote:
> >Jochen Schulz wrote:
> >> Dirk:
[snip]
> >You suggest that everyone compiles X11 him-/herself now?
>
> No, just those that refuse to accept the package maintainers' decisions.
Brian Nelson wrote:
Dirk writes:
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Nobody forces you to do anything. You can compile patch X.org yourself,
run oldstable, switch to another distribution or throw your computer out
of the window. Or you could just accept HAL and go on with your life.
You suggest that everyo
Dirk writes:
> Jochen Schulz wrote:
>> Nobody forces you to do anything. You can compile patch X.org yourself,
>> run oldstable, switch to another distribution or throw your computer out
>> of the window. Or you could just accept HAL and go on with your life.
>
> You suggest that everyone compile
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:20:56 +0200
Dirk wrote:
> Celejar wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:58:12 +0200
> > Dirk wrote:
> >
> >> Avi Greenbury wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> >>> What is the 'best part of Linux' that HAL neglects?
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> The ability to mount devices myself, or not.
>
Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:58:12 +0200
Dirk wrote:
Avi Greenbury wrote:
...
What is the 'best part of Linux' that HAL neglects?
...
The ability to mount devices myself, or not.
This is just wrong; HAL *doesn't automount anything* on its own. It
merely passes information t
steef wrote:
Dirk wrote:
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Dirk:
Ok, let us assume I wouldn't be able to remove HAL from a installed
Debian without breaking X11 permanently and I have a random problem
(pick one from this list:
http://www.google.com/search?q=HAL+problem+linux).
Previously, you said no
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:58:12 +0200
Dirk wrote:
> Avi Greenbury wrote:
...
> > What is the 'best part of Linux' that HAL neglects?
...
> The ability to mount devices myself, or not.
This is just wrong; HAL *doesn't automount anything* on its own. It
merely passes information to a *volume man
Dirk wrote:
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Dirk:
Ok, let us assume I wouldn't be able to remove HAL from a installed
Debian without breaking X11 permanently and I have a random problem
(pick one from this list:
http://www.google.com/search?q=HAL+problem+linux).
Previously, you said not only HAL its
In <4a5f556b.8090...@gmx.net>, Dirk wrote:
>Jeff Soules wrote:
>>> HAL is not "technology moving forward".
>>>
>>> It is a project dedicated to taking away the right to do what you want.
>>
>> I'm sorry, your argument is "HAL hates freedom?" Seriously? You
>> believe there is an entire team of ma
In <4a5f532a.8000...@gmx.net>, Dirk wrote:
>Jochen Schulz wrote:
>> Dirk:
>>> Ok, let us assume I wouldn't be able to remove HAL from a installed
>>> Debian without breaking X11 permanently and I have a random problem
>>> (pick one from this list:
>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=HAL+problem+linu
Jeff Soules wrote:
HAL is not "technology moving forward".
It is a project dedicated to taking away the right to do what you want.
I'm sorry, your argument is "HAL hates freedom?" Seriously? You
believe there is an entire team of malicious devs who've devoted their
weekends to oppressing you
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Dirk:
Ok, let us assume I wouldn't be able to remove HAL from a installed
Debian without breaking X11 permanently and I have a random problem
(pick one from this list:
http://www.google.com/search?q=HAL+problem+linux).
Previously, you said not only HAL itself is the pr
> HAL is not "technology moving forward".
>
> It is a project dedicated to taking away the right to do what you want.
I'm sorry, your argument is "HAL hates freedom?" Seriously? You
believe there is an entire team of malicious devs who've devoted their
weekends to oppressing your choice of mouse
Dirk wrote:
Jeff Soules wrote:
Is that enough of an answer or is there any HAL fanboy left who
want's to
battle choice?
I'm not a HAL fanboy. In fact, I couldn't care less. From the
descriptions, it sounds like HAL (like every other piece of software
ever written) solves some problems while
Dirk:
>
> Ok, let us assume I wouldn't be able to remove HAL from a installed
> Debian without breaking X11 permanently and I have a random problem
> (pick one from this list:
> http://www.google.com/search?q=HAL+problem+linux).
Previously, you said not only HAL itself is the problem, but th
Jeff Soules wrote:
Is that enough of an answer or is there any HAL fanboy left who want's to
battle choice?
I'm not a HAL fanboy. In fact, I couldn't care less. From the
descriptions, it sounds like HAL (like every other piece of software
ever written) solves some problems while potentially c
> Is that enough of an answer or is there any HAL fanboy left who want's to
> battle choice?
I'm not a HAL fanboy. In fact, I couldn't care less. From the
descriptions, it sounds like HAL (like every other piece of software
ever written) solves some problems while potentially creating others.
Su
Avi Greenbury wrote:
Dirk wrote:
Geeez... the problem is that it was promoted to a requirement for
running a Debian Desktop while there was no need for it in the first
place with alternatives like Ubuntu or Windows(!) at hand.
Another problem are the people who think they need to turn Linux i
Sjoerd writes:
> And, finally, you haven't answered the question on what's wrong with
> hal. I'm using it without problems, and even still feel in control when
> needed by altering the .fdi files in /usr/share/hal. So no, I don't see
> the problem, please explain.
Some of us simply don't need it.
Dirk wrote:
Geeez... the problem is that it was promoted to a requirement for
running a Debian Desktop while there was no need for it in the first
place with alternatives like Ubuntu or Windows(!) at hand.
Another problem are the people who think they need to turn Linux into
something like a
Sjoerd Hardeman wrote:
Dirk schreef:
You would have much more credibility in this thread if you provided
solid technical reasons why HAL is bad rather than stomping your feet
while saying "I don't like it!" Please provide a technical reason why
HAL is unacceptable.
HAL causes enough technical
Dirk schreef:
You would have much more credibility in this thread if you provided
solid technical reasons why HAL is bad rather than stomping your feet
while saying "I don't like it!" Please provide a technical reason why
HAL is unacceptable.
HAL causes enough technical problems and negative s
You would have much more credibility in this thread if you provided
solid technical reasons why HAL is bad rather than stomping your feet
while saying "I don't like it!" Please provide a technical reason why
HAL is unacceptable.
HAL causes enough technical problems and negative side-effects. Ju
* Dirk [2009 Jul 16 07:07 -0500]:
> Thierry Chatelet wrote:
> >On Thursday 16 July 2009 12:50:22 Dirk wrote:
> >
> >>Why don't people, who like it, use the real Windows instead of turning
> >>Linux into it and forcing advanced users down to their level?
> >>
> >>
> >>Dirk
> >
> >What level are you
* Andrei Popescu [2009 Jul 16 06:05 -0500]:
> > does seem as though there is a strong sentiment against HAL from
> > several users. You might contact the Xorg developers and ask nicely
> > for them to remove the dependency.
>
> I don't think this is such a good idea. The Debian X Strike Force (
Thierry Chatelet wrote:
On Thursday 16 July 2009 12:50:22 Dirk wrote:
Why don't people, who like it, use the real Windows instead of turning
Linux into it and forcing advanced users down to their level?
Dirk
What level are you taking about? This will look quiet insulting to many people
not
On Thursday 16 July 2009 12:50:22 Dirk wrote:
> Why don't people, who like it, use the real Windows instead of turning
> Linux into it and forcing advanced users down to their level?
>
>
> Dirk
What level are you taking about? This will look quiet insulting to many people
not only using debian t
Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Wed,15.Jul.09, 17:55:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
I actually like HAL as it has relieved me of a great deal of tedium.
That said, I'm sure there are corner cases where it can be a pain.
http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/InputHotplugGuide has some
explanation of why hal
On Wed,15.Jul.09, 17:55:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
>
> I actually like HAL as it has relieved me of a great deal of tedium.
> That said, I'm sure there are corner cases where it can be a pain.
http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/InputHotplugGuide has some
explanation of why hal is needed.
>
On 15 Jul 2009, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> I had this same problem and using the following (in an .xsession in my case)
> solved the problem:
>
> setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp
>
> Cheers,
> Asumu Takikawa
>
I'm using this as well and it works. I have it in .xinitrc. The only
thing is t
Alex Samad:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 06:38:06PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>>
>> I don't understand what you mean about mono. I don't think that I have
>> any mono stuff on my system, and IIUC, Debian won't install it unless
>
> isn't the new gnome package going to bring in mono as a default
Only
Alex Samad writes:
>> I don't understand what you mean about mono. I don't think that I have
>> any mono stuff on my system, and IIUC, Debian won't install it unless
>
> isn't the new gnome package going to bring in mono as a default
The "gnome" meta-package has "depends: tomboy | gnote", where
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 06:38:06PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:53:28 +1000
> Alex Samad wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 05:51:05PM +0200, Dirk wrote:
> > > Jochen Schulz wrote:
> > >> Dirk:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >
> > > it's not just a package... it's an indicator for d
Rick Thomas wrote:
> On Jul 15, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
>
>> setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp
>>
>
> This is good to know. How often does this have to be done? Can I do
> it once and have it survive past closing my X session? Past logging
> out? Past a reboot?
>
* Dirk [2009 Jul 15 17:41 -0500]:
> it's not just a package... it's an indicator for debian losing touch
> with it's main user base: people who dont want all that stuff Ubuntu
> offers, especially annoyingly, interfering junk like HAL...
I didn't know that was the focus. I thought the focus is a
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:53:28 +1000
Alex Samad wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 05:51:05PM +0200, Dirk wrote:
> > Jochen Schulz wrote:
> >> Dirk:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > it's not just a package... it's an indicator for debian losing touch
> > with it's main user base: people who dont want all tha
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 05:51:05PM +0200, Dirk wrote:
> Jochen Schulz wrote:
>> Dirk:
[snip]
>
> it's not just a package... it's an indicator for debian losing touch
> with it's main user base: people who dont want all that stuff Ubuntu
seems that way, with selinux, hal and mono. I loved de
On Jul 15, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
I had this same problem and using the following (in an .xsession in
my case)
solved the problem:
setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp
Cheers,
Asumu Takikawa
This is good to know. How often does this have to be done? Can I do
it
I had this same problem and using the following (in an .xsession in my case)
solved the problem:
setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp
Cheers,
Asumu Takikawa
On 2009-07-15 16:28:27 +0200, Dirk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> the X11 in debian/unstable is very broken right now. It requires HAL
> which
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Dirk:
the X11 in debian/unstable is very broken right now. It requires HAL
which i replaced with a dummy package and now the "DontZap" option in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf is also broken... I can't quit X11 with ctrl+alt+bs
anymore...
I have that problem as well and I am usin
Dirk:
>
> the X11 in debian/unstable is very broken right now. It requires HAL
> which i replaced with a dummy package and now the "DontZap" option in
> /etc/X11/xorg.conf is also broken... I can't quit X11 with ctrl+alt+bs
> anymore...
I have that problem as well and I am using the real HA
Hello,
the X11 in debian/unstable is very broken right now. It requires HAL
which i replaced with a dummy package and now the "DontZap" option in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf is also broken... I can't quit X11 with ctrl+alt+bs
anymore...
Is there a fix or a different option than "DontZap" for this?
I
58 matches
Mail list logo
