ubuntu bulletproof x

[Douglas McClendon]

Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 2007-09-01, 21:03 GMT, Douglas McClendon wrote:
>> Even if those situations account for 1/10,000 users, those are 
>> precisely the cases that need to be covered to market something 
>> as "bulletproof".
> 
> People who are able to find all necessary numbers will most 
> likely have no problem with the most mature front-end for the 
> X configuration -- you know, the know which name consists only 
> from letters "v" and "i" (in this order ;-)).

Very funny.  Obviously the ubuntu tool is designed specifically for 
people who are not put off by inserting a hardware vendors windows 
driver cd into the cdrom, but are put off by using vi.

> 
> No really, what I read in Adam's email (and what's my experience 
> from reading hundreds of Xorg bugs, being bugmaster for RH 
> desktop I read a lot of them), the problems we have are not in 
> not having enough information about hardware (take a look at 
> /var/log/Xorg.0.log -- there is plenty of information there) -- 
> it's that quite often the information provided by hardware is 
> plainly wrong, or that xorg drivers suck.  


Concerning the former,
> I don't understand how would information provided to Windows by 
> the vendor was that much better than information they provide via 
> hardware.

Umm...  Please think about this a bit more.  If the data provided by the 
hardware is "plainly wrong" or "broken", then that is precisely the time 
when data provided on the winblowz driver CD might be right.

Honestly I can't vouch that this is ever the case.  It is pure 
speculation on my part.  But I for one get sick of hearing "you're 
hardware is broken, go suck an egg", when clearly that hardware is not 
broken enough to not work on windows, using the mechanisms they have in 
place (e.g. presumably reading the data from the driver cd).

(and again, for the sake of argument, lets pretend that doing anything 
from a command line, or editing a text file, or researching obscure 
specs about your monitor, is not an option for the users in question)


  And concerning the latter, I don't see any relation to
> "bulletproof X" whatsoever.

correct, nothing in the thread I started, has to do with xorg drivers 
sucking.  It only has to do with monitor configuration, when presumably 
the monitor hardware is failing to provide the correct info to the xorg 
driver.  (though I suppose the same situation could occur if there was a 
bug in the xorg driver reading the information).

But again, this is speculation on my part.  Please correct me if I'm 
wrong.  :)

-dmc