Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Design failures

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 2:25

For example, all X11 clients crash when the server goes down.

When was the last time your browser crashed because a server was down? Or your irc client? Or whatever else there is except for X11 programs? Yeah, that's right.

Why they wouldn't just wait for the server to come up again and reconnect is beyond me. I mean it's a client-server system, so what's the point of not making use of it? Sure, you can connect from some remote machine and play around for a bit, but it's fucking useless when all your programs crash once you disconnect!!!

What the fuck were they thinking?

Name: 2GET 2010-02-17 2:49

It's *usually* more convenient to have all X programs terminate when the server is shutdown, i.e. so you can perform recovery using Ctrl-Alt-Backspace.

However, it'd be nice if they provided a way to detach the client that's separate from that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:01

X11 isn't completely bad, though. I love being able to tunnel X11 clients from my machine to wherever  I am. For example, I'm on a slow-ass Intel Atom box, but the browser I'm using is tunneled from my normal box, a quad-core box which unfortunately doesn't have a working video card at the moment.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:37

>>2
Your "recovery" is about as useful as a "full reboot" for the vast majority of computer users.

P.S.: Not to start a flame war but on Windows you can literally disable and enable a graphics adapter (and update or replace the whole driver in between) and even 3D applications will survive.

>>3
Also remoting via "bitmap" approaches (VNC/RDP) always worked better than X11 even with tricks, and that's the only thing such a design had going for it (I don't know why people keep mentioning that as an X11 advantage; if anything is a terrible disadvantage - Firefox will very easily kill weak machines by uploading too much bitmaps to the X server)

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:44

>>4
Really? Most Windows GPU drivers usually ask you kindly to reboot after installing them.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:47

Can't a client choose not to crash? Xlib doesn't pull some Mesa GLUT shit and bail for you does it?

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:51

>>5
That's the other stuff (crappy custom installer which also installs a branded video control panel and/or other value added shit), not the driver, and like a lot of reboot requests it might not be really needed at all.

In fact, if you look closely, after installing the driver the screen will go blank and then back, before you reboot. At this point the newly installed driver is already running, with full 3D acceleration and everything (test it!).

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 3:52

>>6
Even the client gets in trouble.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 4:22

>>4
I wasn't defending X, I was explaining the design. X is a piece of shit.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 4:41

Maybe /prog/ should write a replacement for X

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 5:37

>>10
back to /anonix/, please

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 7:34

>>10
It's Open Source, after all. Don't like it? You're welcome to change it!

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 7:48

>>12
U MENA FORKING

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 10:29

obligatory
>>13
FORK MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 10:34

>>10
What replacement for X? Go buy a mac if you want pictures, wanker.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 11:23

I think google's plan for the Chrome OS is basically to take Linux and add a new windowing thing, like Apple did with BSD

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 11:28

It should be possible for a programmer du detach his programm from X11 and just have the GUI running, so that when X11 crashes the program can redraw its GUI. But I don't think X can control the status of the programs that are using it and eve if I don't think thats the job of X to do that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 12:29

>>17
X11 is the GUI. If there is no X then where would it redraw the GUI? IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 15:20

>>17
Of course it's the clients job to do it, but currently it's just not done at all. Ideally this should be implemented transparently at the toolkit level.

>>18
I think he means once the X server is restarted.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 15:33

CLIENT MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 16:38

>>20
SERVE MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 16:39

>>20
RESTART MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 16:40

>>21
>>22
ANUSMIND

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 16:57

>>20-23 samefag

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 17:04

>>24
samefag
appending ``fag'' to the end of a word

Back to the imageboards, please.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 17:29

>>25
butthurtfag

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 17:37

>>26
http://boards.4chan.org/b/

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 18:07

>>27 see >>26

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 18:28

double nigger

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-17 23:55

>>28-29
see
>>27

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 8:23

Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare.

Take installation. Linux zealots are now saying "oh installing is so easy, just do apt-get install package or emerge package": Yes, because typing in "apt-get" or "emerge" makes so much more sense to new users than double-clicking an icon that says "setup".

Linux zealots are far too forgiving when judging the difficultly of Linux configuration issues and far too harsh when judging the difficulty of Windows configuration issues. Example comments:

User: "How do I get Quake 4 to run in Linux?"
Zealot: "Oh that's easy! If you have Ubuntu, you have to download quake_4_dapper_i686_010207_glibc.bin, then do chmod +x on the file. Then you have to su to root, make sure you type export LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.2.5 but ONLY if you have that latest libc6 installed. If you don't, don't set that environment variable or the installer will dump core. Before you run the installer, make sure you have the GL drivers for X installed. Get them at [some obscure web address], chmod +x the binary, then run it, but make sure you have at least 10MB free in /tmp or the installer will dump core. After the installer is done, edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf and add a section called "GL" and put "driver nv" in it. Make sure you have the latest version of X.org and Linux kernel 2.6.15 or else X will segfault when you start. OK, run the Quake 4 installer and make sure you set the proper group and setuid permissions on quake4.bin. If you want sound, look here [link to another obscure web site], which is a short HOWTO on how to get sound in Quake 4. That's all there is to it!"

User: "How do I get Quake 4 to run in Windows?"
Zealot: "Oh God, I had to install Quake 4 in Windoze for some lamer friend of mine! God, what a fucking mess! I put in the CD and it took about 3 minutes to copy everything, and then I had to reboot the fucking computer! Jesus Christ! What a retarded operating system!"

So, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that what seems easy and natural to Linux geeks is definitely not what regular people consider easy and natural. Hence, the preference towards Windows.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 8:33

>If you have Ubuntu
What if i have gentoo. Describe the process.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 8:47

>>32
You reverse-engineer Quake4, and then rewrite it yourself as OpenQuake4 so that you can specify your own CFLAGS.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 8:47

>>32
"emerge quake4-bin", copy resources from the CD you bought or vice versa. I have no idea where, but I don't think it's hard to know.

*Windows7-kun*

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 8:53

What if i have gentoo.
　　　　　　　　　　　 　／￣∧＿∧￣￣￣ //￣＼＼
　　　　　　 ＿＿ ⊂／＿＿（´∀｀　）_＿　　/_⊃＿__|　|＼フ ヽ　　CFLAGS JUST KICKED
　　　,　 ´＿　　／　　　／￣￣ ＿_　／￣　ヽ　　　 __ヽ￣￣　|　　IN, YO!
　　/∠__／―/-。―／――∠＿／＿_∧　　| 　 　　　 | ∧＿.|　
　　,========――´=========＝===/⌒ヽ=|.===＝＝| | ヽ￣〕　
　 |　＿　　 |GENTOO| 　　 ＿ 　″ 　|⌒|　|/　　　_＿ /|　 ）ノ　　　　vroom
　 ）_旧＿∈≡≡≡≡∋＿旧＿″＿||　ノ丿＿ -――┘ 丿　　　　　　vroom!
　　 ＼　＼＿ノ ￣￣￣三三三＼　＼＿ノ　　　[三三三三　
　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 9:24

>>32

Oh, there is http://gentoo-portage.com/games-fps/quake4-data .
You know what to do know.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 11:44

>>2
ITT: It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 11:50

>>31
>1% marketshare
Oh no!

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 13:58

Am I the only one that realizes that the normal client/server roles are reversed with X11?

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 14:31

>>39
no sir you are not alone.
what the fuck was the MIT thinking?
so fucked.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 14:44

>>39
Only in that normally servers are "powerful" and clients are not, but with X11 the clients generally run on more powerful systems and the servers on less (since all the "server" does is wait for instructions on what to draw and then draw them; the client does all the actual work of the program to determine what to draw.)

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 15:28

>>41
But what if they're the same machine?

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 15:51

>>39
What? The X server provides the graphics service, and the clients make use of it. Just like a file server provides a file service and a CPU server provides its CPU power.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 17:00

>>43
But when you make use of a service, you don't normally run the server on the local node and the clients on the remote node.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 17:10

How hard would it be to write a new graphical environment for GNU/Linux from scratch? Something that supported the majority of X's features? It can't be that hard.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 17:47

>>39,40,44
X11's terminology is logically correct. See >>41,43. Just because you traditionally attribute the terminology to different systems does not make the situation more logically correct.

>>45
You mean Unix in general. X11 isn't special to GNU/Linux. It doesn't make sense invest significant effort to reimplement X11 when you already have a working Xorg system.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 18:07

>>46

Xorg is working for some values of working that include not working.

see, for example, man xrandr (the fact they need to include a --dryrun option is a big clue), and all the various guis for xrandr, some of which are horriby buggy.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 18:14

>>47
What do you think gives a greater investment/payoff ratio: fixing Xorg or reimplementing X11 from scratch. My money's on fixing Xorg.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 18:54

>>48
you left out the option of fixing this: http://www.fresco.org/
one thing that would need to be fixed is the fact that it's not free, though...

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 19:36

>>49
It is free under the LGPL.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 21:13

Has anybody seen Wayland?
http://groups.google.com/group/wayland-display-server/web/frequently-askeds-questions
They have a working terminal and have gotten an X server running inside it, looks pretty nice.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 21:42

>>40
MIT isn't tradtionally UNIX

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 21:42

>>50
http://slencyclopedia.berlios.de/gui.html
Unfortunately it's not free software; it's under (L)GPL.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 22:31

>>48
My money's on reimplementing from scratch. Or we could just port Rio.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-18 22:56

>>49,51
Where do you guys find these things, at a CORBA conference?

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 0:27

>>52
Yeah, leave it to the hardcore nerds to come up with something worse than what the stoners at Berkeley were churning out.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 2:03

>>53
Software licensed under the LGPL are free software. Users are permitted to help themselves as well as share and cooperate with their community whenever they please.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 2:07

>>57
so i can take LGPL'd code and relicense it under the 2-clause BSD license?

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 2:27

>>58
That liberty is not explicitly expressed within the LGPL. You'd have to get the licensors' permission to do that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 2:42

>>59
then it's not free.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 7:05

>>60
Users are permitted to help themselves as well as share and cooperate with their community whenever they please.
LGPL permits all the essential freedoms that allow users to help oneself and cooperate as part of a community. This makes the LGPL a free software license. Any other liberty that may or may not exist is secondary compared to the essential freedoms.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 7:12

>>61
Back to Berkeley, please.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 9:28

>>61
LGPL permits all the essential freedoms that allow users to help oneself and cooperate as part of a community.

Of course it doesn't -- as pointed out earlier it doesn't permit one to reuse the code under the 2-clause BSD, therefore the flow of code is completely restricted in the "LGPL projects -> BSD projects" direction.

Arguing that it's BSD users' fault and that they can change their license if they really want the code is like arguing that meth is free if you agree to do blowjobs. Yes, it's free as in doesn't cost any money, but you have to suck dicks to get it. If you are not particularly partial to gobbling mouthfuls of smelly cocks then it is not free for you, not really.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 9:46

>>63
Just because two licensing conditions are incompatible doesn't mean that one or both of the licenses are non-free. It just means that the licensing conditions are incompatible. CDDL is incompatible with the GPLv2 are both are free. 3-Clause BSDL is incompatible is GPLv2 and both are free.

So if you can't (or won't) accept the accompanying distribution license to some software code (and therefore reject the code altogether), how can communities manage to cooperate? If worse comes to worst, you might not want to take the code verbatim, but you may certainly study the logic and use it as the basis for something else. This is how individuals and communities can still cooperate in contributing software without directly integrating another person's code.

Arguing that it's BSD users' fault and that they can change their license if they really want the code is like arguing that meth is free if you agree to do blowjobs. Yes, it's free as in doesn't cost any money, but you have to suck dicks to get it. If you are not particularly partial to gobbling mouthfuls of smelly cocks then it is not free for you, not really.
lol wut? I think you need to find another analogy because I have no idea about where you're trying to go.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 9:57

So if you can't (or won't) accept the accompanying distribution license to some software code (and therefore reject the code altogether), how can communities manage to cooperate?
How about by not being dicks and just using free licenses in the first place? Plenty of licenses preferred by 9 of 10 non-dicks lets the code be shared with pretty much anything just fine.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 10:21

I think everybody's trolled GPLv2/3 a lot, but I'm surprised that something even less free than it doesn't get trolled as much: The AGPL.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 10:25

>>65
How about by not being dicks and just using free licenses in the first place? Plenty of licenses preferred by 9 of 10 non-dicks lets the code be shared with pretty much anything just fine.
and just using free licenses in the first place?
MIT, BSD, WTFPL, public domain are all more free than GPL.

You know what's really awesome about open source Lisp code? Almost all of it is licensed as MIT, BSD, public domain, LLGPL (more free LGPL which lets you statically link too), or something else free-er than vanilla GPL. So far few things are done as LGPL, and much lesser (and less serious projects) are done as GPL. Most people avoid the latter as cancer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 10:28

>>34
I'd just like  to interject  for a moment. What you're refering to as Windows 7, is in fact, Windows Vista SP3, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Mojave Experiment 2.0. Windows 7 is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another marketing scheme by Microsoft to trick users into trying Vista, a full OS as defined by Microsoft.

Many computer users run a modified version of Vista every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of Vista which is widely used is often called "Windows 7," and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Vista system, developed by Microsoft.

There really is a Windows 7, and these people are using it, but it is just part of the system they use. Windows 7 is the Graphical User Interface; the program in the system that lets idiots click on things and think they know how a computer works. The Graphical User Interface is an essential part of an operating system that was made for retards, but useless by itself; it can only appear to have a function in the context of the user not knowing how their OS works. The Windows 7 GUI is normally used in combination with the Vista operating system; the whole system is basically Windows Vista with shinier buttons added. All the so called "Windows 7" users are really users of Windows Vista SP3.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 10:41

>>68
Why bother with marketing names at all? Just call it after kernel versions:

NT3   - NTOS 3.x
NT4   - NTOS 4.x
2k    - NTOS 5.0
XP    - NTOS 5.1
2k3   - NTOS 5.2
Vista - NTOS 6.0
WS2k8 - NTOS 6.0
2k8r2 - NTOS 6.1
Win7  - NTOS 6.1

The Server vs Desktop differences tend to be in software included, licensing options/settings, and some minor kernel tweaking to accomodate more common usage scenarios, but in most cases, they're just builds targetted/tweaked with different goals in mind.

9x kernel line is ignored as while they have some shared code, and implements a more limited version of winapi, it has completly different internals, and is a completly different kernel than than NT. (Versions there are 1.0,2.0,3.0,3.1,4.0,... (9x line)).

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 10:58

>>69

Because that goes against their marketing strategy. Idiots are a lot more excited moving from smelly old Windows Vista to shiny new Windows 7; NT 6.0 to NT 6.1 doesn't really justify the money for a new system, does it? Giving it a cool new name and look makes people think they're actually getting something cool and new.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 11:10

>>68,70
If I didn't know better, I could swear that you are of the opinion that such marketing tactics do not work on you.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 11:19

>>71
If I didn't know better, I could swear that you are of the opinion that replying derisively to copypasta is the highest form of intellectual discussion.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-19 20:12

>>66
No one uses the AGPL. The only one you could possibly troll with AGPL is RMS Mary-Sue himself.
>>67
I think we're actually in agreement.

Name: Anonymous 2010-02-21 11:18

>>31
edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf and add a section called "GL" and put "driver nv" in it.
wat

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-26 15:38

<

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-06 9:16

Back to /b/, ``GNAA Faggot''

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 16:54

Name: Anonymous 2011-07-20 9:21

　　　　　　　　　　 __　　　　　　　　　￣　-,／)
　　　　　　　 , --'.:::::::', ---- 、　　,-、,-'-'　/:)
　　　　　　　/:::::::::::---:::::::::::::::: ヽ　ヽ::::::::::::::::/
　　　　　　ノﾉ:::::::::ﾉ:::::::::::::::::::::::ヽ:::ヽ　ヽ／＼|
　　　　　/ :/:::ノ::::ﾉ::::::ﾉi:::::人::::::|::::::}.　 |／:::::|
　 　 　　{:(:(:::/::／ ゝ,ノ ﾉノ ／))::ノ:) 　|＼//|
　　　　 人:.:.ノ::(　(ﾋ_] 　　　ﾋ_ﾝ/:::.:.ﾉ　|//＼|
　　 　 ( 　)(:::::人'''　　,＿__,　 '' ﾉ:) (:( /ヽヽ::|
　　 　　) 　: )ﾉ:.:.) 　　ヽ _ﾝ　　(::ﾉ:.:ノ''' ヽヽ/
　　　 ノ　　:( : ):(＞.., ______ ._イﾉ／:::::::::::／
　　　('　　　ｨ´￣￣ヾゝ====i:ノ/:::::::::／
　　　 ヽ　 i:::::::::::i::::::i◇◇◇◇i::::::／（
　　　 /　 .i二二i::::::|>◇◇◇<|:::::!　　',
　　 ノ　　 ';::::::::::k::::|´　　　　｀i:::::;'　　　）
.　 （　　　　',:::::::::::',:i￣￣￣￣|:::〈　　 （
　　）　　　　ヽ:::::::::ヽ￣~７ヽ￣|::::::',　　 ヽ
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -