[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SEUL: Stopping X


Moved to UI.

On 18-Feb-98 The Thought Assassin wrote:
- ->> ( startex only works when X is down )
- -> ??? you can run startx whenever. you can't run two Xs on the same VC, but
- -> you can run as many copies of startx as you like (that is to say, there is
- -> a limit, but you wouldn't like to try to reach it)

Everybody makes mistakes and forgets functions in Linux.  A lot easier to do
than in Windoze' limited interface.  However, I have seen some pretty strange
comments from some of our list members that only make me wonder how familiar
they really are with the topics they are so feverishly arguing.  Not just this
poster either.  I believe it was Kevin.

Starting more than one X session on one machine is pretty common knowledge for
anybody that uses X with any kind of regularity.  I'd say the average newbie
will most likely discover how it's done, by RTFM or by asking, within the first
month of using it.  I believe that is pretty conservative too.

This tells me that preference is winning over knowledge.  Not to come down too
hard, but if you are going to make a statement about something that is very
fundemental at least RTFM and make sure you're right, specially if you know you
really don't have that much experience in the topic.

I mean I have been using Linux for 3 or 4 years now and have been using X the
entire time.  Some of the other leaders and members have more experience than I
do and a lot of them definately know more than I do about some aspects of Linux
wether they've used it as long as I have or not.

So don't just jump on this list full of old timers, programmers, sysadmin,
network engineers, phisicists, computer scientists, college students and
professors and try to tell them something they know is completely wrong.


AGAIN!  CAN EVERYBODY READ THIS?  I have solved the loop-o-death problem.  It's
gone, history.  It took me longer to remember what I changed in my config file
to make the loop occur than it took to fix the loop itself.

- -> A problem which has already been solved. If you merely define the problem
- -> properly, you ought immediately see that it doesn't really exist.
- -> The loop of death is not inherent in XDM - I challenge anyone to prove
- -> that it is - they will probably see the flaw in their reasoning as they
- -> write....

Exactly right.  It was a problem caused by two programs expecting the other to
do the right thing.  It boils down to a missing link, as in a chain link.  And I
put a link in there for them.

- ---
E-Mail: Cyberdyn@seul.org       Date: 18-Feb-98        Time: 01:23:35
Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the
incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.
                -- G.B. Shaw

Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv