Corporate creep in Linux? (mini-rantette)
in [Slackware]
|
From: notbob on 11 Sep 2009 18:44 On 2009-09-11, Peter Chant <REMpeteOVE(a)petezilla.co.uk> wrote: > Really, except for embedded why would you want to play around with > /dev. ....and it's not like you can't, if you want to. Those cryptic mount and fstab thingies still work as good as ever. nb
From: dae3 on 11 Sep 2009 23:39 Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: > Responding to Jim Diamond: > >> On 2009-09-11 at 12:42 ADT, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: >>> Responding to Jim Diamond: >>> >>>> On 2009-09-11 at 05:57 ADT, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: >>>>> Responding to dae3: [...] >>>>>> For that matter, I wonder what's wrong with xterm... >>>>> >>>>> A good point, seeing as RXVT's key strength is that is it lighter >>>>> than xterm, and these days thats not even going to cause a ripple on >>>>> today's hardware. >>>>> MRXVT does do multiple tabs though, and all the fancy stuff if you >>>>> want it. >>>> >>>> I think it is still lacking utf8 support, which is a bit of a nuisance >>>> in some circumstances. Also, it doesn't use X resources, which IMHO >>>> is a Bad Thing. Other than that, it's not a bad terminal emulator. >> >>> A console that doesn't require X resources? Isn't that a /good/ thing? >> >> At the risk of being pedantic, this sub-thread concerns terminal >> emulators, not consoles. Since these terminal emulators run under the X >> window system, they have functionality which could be controlled via X >> window resources, rather than via config files. >> I don't get why you think not requiring X resources would be a good >> thing. Do tell. >> Jim > > This is all in the loose "we're actually just talking bollocks here" > sense here, you understand? > And its "At the risk of /becoming/ pedantic". Thank you. ;) I think there's been a misunderstanding: Jim was talking about "X resources" as in xrdb(1), which is a standard way of setting X app preferences. -- ~> cat /etc/*-{version,release}|head -n1 && uname -moprs|fold -sw72 Slackware 12.2.0 Linux 2.6.27.7-crrm i686 AMD Turion(tm) 64 Mobile Technology MK-36 GNU/Linux
From: Helmut Hullen on 12 Sep 2009 01:35 Hallo, Peter, Du meintest am 11.09.09: > Really, except for embedded why would you want to play around with > /dev. OK I have failed when trying to make udev call things what I > wanted but how is mknod any easier - I suppose it is if you have > spent a lifetime memorising the mystic numbers it demands to be fed > with! Most times "MAKEDEV" does the job, not me. Viele Gruesse Helmut "Ubuntu" - an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
From: Mike Jones on 12 Sep 2009 06:50 Responding to dae3: > Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: > >> Responding to Jim Diamond: >> >>> On 2009-09-11 at 12:42 ADT, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: >>>> Responding to Jim Diamond: >>>> >>>>> On 2009-09-11 at 05:57 ADT, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: >>>>>> Responding to dae3: > [...] >>>>>>> For that matter, I wonder what's wrong with xterm... >>>>>> >>>>>> A good point, seeing as RXVT's key strength is that is it lighter >>>>>> than xterm, and these days thats not even going to cause a ripple >>>>>> on today's hardware. >>>>>> MRXVT does do multiple tabs though, and all the fancy stuff if you >>>>>> want it. >>>>> >>>>> I think it is still lacking utf8 support, which is a bit of a >>>>> nuisance in some circumstances. Also, it doesn't use X resources, >>>>> which IMHO is a Bad Thing. Other than that, it's not a bad terminal >>>>> emulator. >>> >>>> A console that doesn't require X resources? Isn't that a /good/ >>>> thing? >>> >>> At the risk of being pedantic, this sub-thread concerns terminal >>> emulators, not consoles. Since these terminal emulators run under the >>> X window system, they have functionality which could be controlled via >>> X window resources, rather than via config files. I don't get why you >>> think not requiring X resources would be a good thing. Do tell. >>> Jim >> >> This is all in the loose "we're actually just talking bollocks here" >> sense here, you understand? >> And its "At the risk of /becoming/ pedantic". Thank you. ;) > > > I think there's been a misunderstanding: Jim was talking about "X > resources" as in xrdb(1), which is a standard way of setting X app > preferences. Inaccuracy and mistakes are an occupational hazard of talking bollocks. There is, however, a seductive quality about it all. ;) -- *===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/ *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/ *===( http://www.slackware.com/
From: Mike Jones on 12 Sep 2009 06:54
Responding to notbob: > On 2009-09-11, Peter Chant <REMpeteOVE(a)petezilla.co.uk> wrote: > >> Really, except for embedded why would you want to play around with >> /dev. > > ...and it's not like you can't, if you want to. Those cryptic mount and > fstab thingies still work as good as ever. > > nb Mount this, there, type=that, +parameters. Cryptic? The point was that you need to have a dev to mount in the 1st place. -- *===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/ *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/ *===( http://www.slackware.com/ |