Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #89055 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-07-26 01:09 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200 |
| Articles | 13 on this page of 53 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 01:09 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-26 07:22 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 20:37 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:16 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:00 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:40 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:10 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-26 21:24 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:02 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 02:59 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:18 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Epherma <epherma@remort.app.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:31 -0700
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 04:35 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:37 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 11:51 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread (was: Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:48 +0100
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 17:19 +0100
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:40 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:22 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 14:44 -0700
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 21:47 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 17:57 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:11 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:46 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:47 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:35 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:12 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:07 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:19 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:08 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:19 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:30 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 15:07 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:48 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:51 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2026-07-26 23:27 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:23 -0400
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 09:00 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:10 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2026-07-27 15:45 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:16 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:24 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 19:55 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 00:59 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:54 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:08 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-26 23:27 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <114655s$2pc38$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89070 |
At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > > > For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, > > no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing > > with cloudflare. > > “no java script†on the one hand, yet “can read any site†on the other. > > Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without > refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) > > -- Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-26 21:23 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <SBGdnWsy5-8cLvv3nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #89072 |
On 7/26/26 19:27, Robert Heller wrote: > At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >> >>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >>> with cloudflare. >> >> “no java script†on the one hand, yet “can read any site†on the other. >> >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) Heh heh ... yea ... no such thing as infinite energy. They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid. Wonder what happened ? Did read about a few test roads where they bury magnetic coils - these, by inductive coupling, power the vehicle motor. Of course SOMEBODY has to pay for all that power ... ain't nothin' "free".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <nco5u4FovvdU24@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89081 |
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 21:23:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid. > Wonder what happened ? Ford didn't make any promises with the Nucleon. It was a concept based on small, lightweight reactors becoming available in the future. Never happened. I do remember Chrysler's turbine car from the '64 World's Fair. There were working prototypes but that didn't prove out either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 09:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1147365$30n9l$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89072 |
On 2026-07-27, Robert Heller wrote: > At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >> >> > For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >> > no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >> > with cloudflare. >> >> âÂÂno java scriptâ on the one hand, yet >> âÂÂcan read any siteâ on the other. >> >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) Why reinvent the wheel? Just go with a train! -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 01:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncnpglFovvdU19@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89070 |
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > >> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, no >> AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing with >> cloudflare. > > “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. > > Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without > refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. I've done several web map implementations with ArcGIS SDK for JavaScript, Leaflet, and even Google early on. John would be surprised to find the basic HTML creates a div for the JaveScript API to use. There ain't no there there anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 15:45 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <875x205yx5.fsf@eder.anydns.info> |
| In reply to | #89070 |
On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > >> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >> with cloudflare. > > “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. > > Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without > refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! 'Andreas -- ceterum censeo redmondinem esse delendam
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 16:16 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <RvL9S.338579$0CK1.148439@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #89100 |
On 2026-07-27, Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote: > On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! I'll let you explain when the brownouts start. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 18:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1148490$3c3hi$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89100 |
On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: > On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >> >>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >>> with cloudflare. >> >> “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. >> >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! > Really? Where does the electricity come from then? > 'Andreas > -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 19:55 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncpkbnFtqkuU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89114 |
On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote:
>> On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote:
>>>
>>>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script,
>>>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing
>>>> with cloudflare.
>>>
>>> “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other.
>>>
>>> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without
>>> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that.
>>
>> Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel!
>>
> Really?
It is strictly true :-D
>
> Where does the electricity come from then?
Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D
>
>> 'Andreas
>>
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 00:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ncnos3FovvdU17@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89065 |
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, no > AI, > fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing with > cloudflare. What are corporations giving us ? Nothing but spyware, > ads, > DRM and soon ID checks. I use Brave and LibreWolf. The LibreWolf developers have said they'll strip out any AI found in the Firefox codebase. Brave does have the Leo AI that can be disabled. Tor is available from Brave or as a standalone. I use the standalone. Users may think they don't want JavaScript but that will significantly impact their browsing experience. Better put on a black hat if you expect to sneak by Cloudflare, Anubis, or other tools used by sites to prevent scraping by bots, DDoS attacks, and other 'features' of the web in 2026.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 08:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11472qv$30n9l$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89074 |
On 2026-07-27, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > >> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, no >> AI, >> fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing with >> cloudflare. What are corporations giving us ? Nothing but spyware, >> ads, >> DRM and soon ID checks. > > I use Brave and LibreWolf. The LibreWolf developers have said they'll > strip out any AI found in the Firefox codebase. Brave does have the Leo AI > that can be disabled. Tor is available from Brave or as a standalone. I > use the standalone. > > Users may think they don't want JavaScript but that will significantly > impact their browsing experience. Better put on a black hat if you expect > to sneak by Cloudflare, Anubis, or other tools used by sites to prevent > scraping by bots, DDoS attacks, and other 'features' of the web in 2026. Some Anubis deployments can work without JS, besides being keener on certain UA strings. Cloudflare and reCAPTCHA are the great offenders here, and the problem isn't even requiring JS, it is that they make no effort to be compatible, and so either you're one of the few browsers they decided to support or you're out. The issue may even currently be lack of certain JS features, but they could easily go the extra mile to try to detect when browsers which behave the same-ish aren't exactly the same. What's amazing is that they're selling the new "protection" on top of the old Browser Integrity Check, which did have fallbacks and was nowhere as limited as "Turnstile". It's also amazing they manage to retain their business at this scale, given there was at least one incident where they didn't test and managed to create a self-DDoS... Google's reCAPTCHA seems to still have some fallbacks, but those aren't clear in the obfuscated code *and* Google isn't willing to consider portability, attempts to contact them result in being directed to StackOverflow... -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-26 21:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <DHudnZaoAbQxMvv3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #89065 |
On 7/26/26 16:00, John McCue wrote: > c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >> Plenty of POLITICS, some 'existential' and >> 'philosophical' stuff ... but not much Linux. > > true > >> Oh well, maybe not TOO much "Linux" happening >> at the moment ... gotta fill in ..... > > Not much is really happening, Linux has matured. You > can get native office suits, stream music and video and > even use bluetooth. Agreed ... a good level of functionality has now been reached - so things don't change as fast anymore. But there will always be SOME weird things, any system so complex WILL have such weirdness. Also not everybody is a Linux ultra-guru, many of us haven't used EVERY capability/utility/whatever. Help will be needed. I've never used 'Docker' for example - something about the concept weirds me out. So if I ever DO need to use it ... who can provide the finer-level advice ? > But in reality, corporations are now and have been pushing > Linux changes for almost 20 years. In the past users > had influence on the direction of Linux. Now end user > requirements are completely ignored. Well, not "completely" ... but it's not as good as it used to be. > For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no > java script, no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read > any site without dealing with cloudflare. What are > corporations giving us ? Nothing but spyware, ads, DRM > and soon ID checks. Browsers ... you're looking at relatively few makers and at that point you're out of Linus's sphere. The makers DO wanna make some money - and that means making things more friendly for ads/spying. Oh well, use Duck and put NoScript on yer browser. Not perfect, but 'better'. I see sometimes up to 20 JS thingies in NoScript. Trial and error, only allow JUST what you need for what you're doing. > To me, most distros are very close to becoming an exact > clone of M/S Windows or Apple OS. The way things are > going it will be almost impossible to tell these apart > in maybe 5 to 10 years. Well, Linux could NEVER be as bad as Winders :-) >> I'd rather see SOMETHING in the groups rather >> than NOTHING. >> >> However I do expect more Linux/etc ... as "AI" >> kinda takes over EVERYTHING. Who can do the >> better job ? Where is the money/hiring going >> to go ? What happens when Linus gets Too Old ? >> Will Claude/Chat out-program ALL humans ? >> >> M$/Apple want to DESTROY Linux - the entire >> computing world MUST be in their grasp, and >> make them LOTS OF MONEY. They have many many >> resources, lots of lawyers, lots of infiltrators. > > See rant above :) But I think it is many more corporations > then just M/S, it is just Microsoft is the most visible. > Just look at who is pushing Wayland instead of enhancing > X11. If end users were in control like we were in the > 90s, X11 would have improved a lot over the last 15 years > instead of people working on Wayland. Everybody wants to make a buck - and at this point anything 'net' is a political football too. Predictable, pain in the ass, but predictable. We will just have to devise ways to work AROUND most of the bullshit. I'd REALLY like to see a good clean revision of X11 than anything Wayland. X11, at this point, "just works" and there are many utilities and docs. As I don't do video games the Wayland claim to "speed" doesn't impress me much. Heh, I do remember early X11 ... took me two days to tweak obscure poorly-documented config files before it'd even find my mouse and monitor, much less operate them reliably. I was a lot younger then - today, dunno if I'd put in that much effort. Oh, and don't forget the BSDs ... not the latest greatest drivers but they're solid. A few distros are actually good-looking now too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ncpksnFtqkuU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89076 |
On 2026-07-27 03:08, c186282 wrote:
> On 7/26/26 16:00, John McCue wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
...
>> See rant above :) But I think it is many more corporations
>> then just M/S, it is just Microsoft is the most visible.
>> Just look at who is pushing Wayland instead of enhancing
>> X11. If end users were in control like we were in the
>> 90s, X11 would have improved a lot over the last 15 years
>> instead of people working on Wayland.
>
> Everybody wants to make a buck - and at this point
> anything 'net' is a political football too. Predictable,
> pain in the ass, but predictable. We will just have to
> devise ways to work AROUND most of the bullshit.
>
> I'd REALLY like to see a good clean revision of X11
> than anything Wayland. X11, at this point, "just
> works" and there are many utilities and docs. As
> I don't do video games the Wayland claim to "speed"
> doesn't impress me much.
>
> Heh, I do remember early X11 ... took me two days
> to tweak obscure poorly-documented config files
> before it'd even find my mouse and monitor, much
> less operate them reliably. I was a lot younger
> then - today, dunno if I'd put in that much effort.
Took me months. Tring to find documentation, reading it, then doing this
or this other small change. My hardware was not completely standard.
There was a GUI in SuSE to config X. Not YaST, something else I can't
remember.
I asked ChatGPT: "Yes. It was called SaX, short for SuSE Advanced X
Configuration Tool."
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web