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

Re: SEUL: SEUL duplicating efforts?

Orn E. Hansen wrote:
> řann 14-Feb-98 skrifar Donovan Rebbechi:
> >
> > OK. The new one does the following  :
> > *     Probes for video card (and usually gets it right)
> > *     Probes for mouse (and configures PS/2 mice correctly, which the
> > old one didn't)
> >
> > But it still has the following problems:
> >
> > *     Firstly, it doesn't configure serial mice, ie doesn't make the
> > link from /dev/mouse
> > *     In fact it doesn't even restart gpm. The result is that the newbie
> > is stuck wondering what they're doing wrong, especially if they set the
> > link, and their serial mouse still doesn't work.
> > *     The Configurator doesn't set the link from X to the server.
> > *     Setting up the monitor is still a problem. Sometimes it works the
> > first time and sometimes it is a real headache. Even when it does work,
> > frequently (usually), the performance (resolution/color/refresh rate) are
> > sub-optimal...
> > *     Still, the configurator on RedHat 5 gave me top colour depth
> > straight away, RH 4.1 didn't.  (though the refresh rate wasn't good), and
> > set up my
> > NEC VERSA without any probs.
> >
>   First of all, most of these problems shouldn't be taken care of by the
> X configurator.  It is generally designed to setup the server/card/depth
> with only keyboard and mouse sliced in.  The basic installation should
> configure devices, setup preferred languages, etc.
>   Another point I'd like to get at, is that to boot the user into a shell
> is not a good idea.  One could set up a choices of following installtions
> of linux to the user.
>   A. Bare bones linux
>   B. Bare bones graphics workstation
>   C. Development Workstation
>   D. An Office Workstation
>   E. A Drawing Workstation
>   F. My University Companion :-)
>   G. Just try to fill my HD, if you can :-)
>   The A could be the installation of general Linux essentials.  Within this
> process, belongs the setup of Devices, and language.  The system has to
> check if there is a specific mouse on the computer, if there isn't then
> ask the user if he has a serial mouse connected and then to wich port, the
> user tells about the port and the system peeks here to see if there is a
> mouse, if there is it makes the link /dev/ttySx <-> /dev/mouse.
>   But a graphics workstation setup, should never depend on the user to start
> the graphics.  That's a bare bones linux, with a bundle of X tools patched
> in and a script to start it.  And it's exactly this that has made Windows
> products more popular with Users than Unix.  My sister doesn't even know how
> to configure her keyboard, you can't expect her to spend any time trying to
> learn... her time in the office is spent with CAD/CAM tools, which are
> complicated enough, she neither has the enthusiasm nor the will to spend
> any time to explicidly learn about specific scripts or their meaning... she's
> got a life.  Once she's got Windows up, it *looks* great, and it's easy to
> handle... so what if she has to reboot once a day? she's got to that anyway.
>   These are the people you're dealing with, and booting them into a shell
> and telling them to execute scripts to setup graphics... they're going to
> answer "Hey, is this a Sun 3? I can get those at the scrap yard?".  Give them
> a menu shell, and they'll say "Hey, this is just like my old MS-DOS 5.0
> system".  Sure there are people out there that think Windows 3.1 is great,
> and there are also people who think MS-DOS was great, just as there are
> still guys out there that use 7 bit communications.  But that's just a few
> exceptions... the main stream want's hot new stuff.  This is what MS knows,
> and this is what helps them keep ahead...
This argument makes more sence to me than all the other 'start-in-gui'
arguments.  You are making sence ( mostly )
>   If the user says "I want a graphics workstation", then that's what should
> be setup for him, along with a graphics login screen.  If the user says "I
> want a bare bones linux", then ok... bare bones it is, and shells.  Unless
> the installation procedure can't figure the users system out correctly, in
> which case it could either ask her/him to file a report to us... or, simply
> ask the user questions about the details to have them solved.
The problems with auto detection aren't when the system says it can't
detect the
particular device.  It's when the system detects it and thinks it's
else.  In other words the only possible safeguard is to ask the user to 
confirm the identity of the detected device ( "I have found an S3 Virge
Video card, If this is correct press enter,  if not select card from
If unsure or if your card isn't on the list, just hit enter" )
>   At least, that's what I think :)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Orn Einar Hansen                         oe.hansen@oehansen.pp.se
>                                           oehansen@daimi.aau.dk
>                                         voice+fax; +46 035 217194

: "Through the firewall, out the router, down the T1, across the
: backbone, bounced from satellite, Nothing but net."
: 	remove BAD.SPAM or your replies will go astray.
: "OpenScape 5.0 ; The Browser of the future" : http://www.openscape.com