0963: "X11"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
radtea
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:57 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby radtea » Wed Oct 12, 2011 11:57 am UTC

Sebastian wrote:Lol

Xorg.conf that's soo(append many more ooo here) yesterday.

I never had to edit my Xorg.conf in the last 1.5h years because was empty.
Now all the relevant stuff has been moved to /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/, and having one single configfile is deprecated.
I have one file in there to change the keyboard layout.

And yes I'm running dualscreen an ati radeon.
So I don't know what's your problem.


This. This is my problem. Once upon a time, about 15 years ago, I could make X jump through the right hoops by editing the config files, although I'm pretty sure it was XF86Config back then. Dot clocks and all that. xorg.conf was kinda sorta like that, so I could deal, and chipset support got good enough you no longer had to go in and figure out which rev of the S3 or whatever you had.

Then some idiot decided to make it "better" by changing everything, instantly obsoleting all that knowledge, and not actually improving anything, and failing to adequately document the new system.

It's great that the new system "just works" for you. But I'm damned sure it doesn't "just work" for quite a few people. Your post basically says, "I don't have a problem, so you shouldn't have a problem," which is pretty much like saying, "I had a three-course meal last night. I don't see why you should be hungry!"
Coming on Midsummer's Day to a Web Browser Near You: http://www.songsofalbion.com

nxuul
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 12:48 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby nxuul » Wed Oct 12, 2011 12:53 pm UTC

Tub wrote: -snip-


Wayland is likely to have the ability to run X inside it, for compatibility purposes. At least until everyone is moved over to wayland. I know Qt5 has wayland support already, so it's getting there.

keith1993
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:22 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby keith1993 » Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:08 pm UTC

I remember playing with Linux a few years ago and this all being a total nightmare, but after properly swapping to Ubuntu less then six-months ago, I don't think I've ever been near it, and when presented with a time I thought I might have to approach it (on dual-monitors there are zero options regarding which screen the Unity launcher goes on and programs full-screen on). I simply unplugged both monitors and swapped the connectors over. Which although too trivial to think of before a couple of hours head scratching took far less time then some of the weird dual-monitor stuff I had going on in Windows in the years previous (why would I ever want to turn off my ability to drag from monitor to monitor?)

User avatar
madjo
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:07 am UTC
Location: Dutch-land
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby madjo » Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:16 pm UTC

I still wake up screaming from the time I had to edit xorg.conf to get my wacom-enabled touchscreen to work.. it's a moot point now, as the stylus doesn't work well anymore (need to press one of the buttons otherwise the cursor won't move, and I can't figure out if it's a software issue or a hardware issue).
:)

You are carrying:
- a slightly paranoid Android
- two left feet (not my own)
- a still unfed and very hungry hippo
- broadsword of +5 ridiculousness stained with the blood of the undead souls
- a stetson Resistol, cuz stetson Resistols are cool.

User avatar
willpellmn
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:05 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby willpellmn » Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:55 pm UTC

The computer part of this comic is entirely 100% over my head; I have no idea what X11 is. But I do know who Thomas Jefferson is (and what a sad state on the condition of our educational system it is that I have to clarify that I do), and now I'm going nuts trying to figure out why he picked nineteen years, instead of some more natural-seeming number. Why not make it an even generation, Monticello-Man? Surely one extra year can't hurt that much? Or, conversely, why not eighteen (three Senate terms), or sixteen (four Presidential terms), or a flat decade-and-a-half? (three-halves of a census cycle - okay they probably didn't do censuses...censi? censae? who knows....the same way back then.)

User avatar
BentFranklin
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 4:20 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby BentFranklin » Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:56 pm UTC

I like the S shape of the curve. I hope it's intentional. I interpret it to mean that if he hasn't fiddled with xorg in a while he starts to miss it.
Last edited by BentFranklin on Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:57 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Apeiron
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 5:34 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Apeiron » Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:57 pm UTC

i like the idea of a generational revisiting of laws. It could allow us to do things like change: "well regulated" to "well supplied", so the people who are alive can understand it.

westrim wrote:*Reads thread.* *Hugs Windows laptop.*


^

i have never heard of it so i must be pretty happy.

User avatar
grobus
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:32 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby grobus » Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:38 pm UTC

LAME

(So lame that I signed up just to post this comment)

Oktalist
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:13 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Oktalist » Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:47 pm UTC

Spare a thought for those who have tried to edit sendmail configs.
philip1201 wrote:Not everything which maps countable infinities onto finite areas is a Lovecraft reference.

iwdw
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:48 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby iwdw » Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:33 pm UTC

Just me, or is this comic a bit dated?

I haven't had to hand-touch an xorg.conf or XF86Config file in over 5 years.

User avatar
ubikuberalles
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:09 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby ubikuberalles » Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:39 pm UTC

iwdw wrote:I haven't had to hand-touch an xorg.conf or XF86Config file in over 5 years.


Then I would argue that you don't use Linux much. ;)

I have to deal with X11 issues about once a week. But, then again, I support over 200 Linux boxes. Thanks to NVDIA, however, my interaction with xorg.conf has been kept to a minimum. If my customer has an NVIDIA card, I download the driver, install it and then run the nvidia-settings program. That program resolves 99% of any xorg.conf issues that might come up. It's not perfect and I've had to struggle with xorg.conf to get the settings right but I still love using it when I get the chance.
Ranch!

User avatar
tetsujin
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby tetsujin » Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:49 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:I've never had to go on xorg.conf

Probably has to do with me having no idea what it is.

In regards to the Constitution, ours seems to be working pretty well as it is...


I don't know. I think maybe we need to revise it, punch it up with a few "yes, we really mean it"s.
---GEC
I want to create a truly new command-line shell for Unix.
Anybody want to place bets on whether I ever get any code written?

webgrunt
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 4:04 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby webgrunt » Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:19 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
In regards to the Constitution, ours seems to be working pretty well as it is...

If you think there are no worms in that can, it's because they all escaped at the speed of light the instant the seal was broken.

User avatar
Primis
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:07 am UTC
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Primis » Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:44 pm UTC

To clear up any questions about this comic, I'm gonna explain it to the windows running world:
X11 is the display subsystem for Unix Operating systems (Linux, FreeBSD, Hurd) OS X has an X11 client, but it's main display subsystem is called quartz.
now, the group of developers that make the X11 used in Linux is call their version of it "xorg" thus, xorg.conf is the configuration file. Back in the early days of linux (or in barebones situations, or in BSD...) you had to configure everything! from your mouse type, to the resolution, to the h and v sync, and the interrupt number. Basically, unless you made your own computer you probably didn't know enough to open this file.

Why is it called X11? Well X11 is the 11th version of the "X windowing system" and it's predecessor was called "w" (for windows)

The rewrite hovertext is in reference to the fact that x11's code base is the same one since the 80's. Sure you could argue that there is a lot of "Polish" like the ability to have 2^16 monitors all act as one big display. But there is a TON of dust that has gathered over the years, such as the ability to run serial x clients (who would use that!) which has slowed down X. X doesn't need to be replaced per se, but it needs it's developers to sit down, and trim the fat.
Image
Key Fingerprint: 49A8 7E39 87C1 DFB2 B0EB F7F4 1235 F2BB 9442 E47F
PhoenixRising wrote:What is this sleep you speak of? There is only the castle. All must yield to the castle.

dysprog
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:45 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby dysprog » Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:47 pm UTC

tagno25 wrote:
dysprog wrote:5 years ago...
Installing dual monitors on windows xp
1) re boot
2) fiddle with some graphical configuration tools for 5 mins.

Installing dual monitors on recent-ish fedora
1) 5 or 6 reboots.
2) lots of cryptic text editing
3) consult google, find wrong answers.
5) never got it working quite right.

I used linux for 3 years. I switched back to windows.


Installing Dual monitors for me has NEVER needed a reboot unless I just installed a new video card. Windows never made me reboot to add a second monitor. Linux was difficult 5 years ago, sure I had to kill X a few times, but not reboot. Current Linux distros are as easy to setup multiple monitors as Windows.


Ok, strictly speaking, I probably didn't NEED the reboot even on windows. I didn't know if DVI was hot-pluggable, so I shutdown first just to be sure.

But when I killed X, my OS rebooted. Maybe I was doing something wrong, and if I knew the secret incantation, I could have avoided reboots. But I didn't know the incantation, and windows did not require one.

Which is kind of my point.

Kaelin
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:25 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Kaelin » Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:54 pm UTC

I'm going nuts trying to figure out why he picked nineteen years, instead of some more natural-seeming number.


[I'm going to start with this quote's concern and sort of drift from there.]

It was set as the period of time that it was believed to take for half of those of voting age (or perhaps half of those who had the right to vote) to die off, and that 19 happened to be the nearest integer of years. Given the changes to the voting population over time, that choice of 19 years would be ~30 years nowadays (at least if we control for generation bulges/busts). A casual Internet search actually suggested that Jefferson had calculated his figure to be 18 years + 8 months but decided to round up to 19 to make things nicer. In some respects the result is annoying, but by it being an "odd" sounding figure, it sort of begs you to understand *why* the 19 came up, and when you understand why he uses it, it makes it easier for you re-evaluate whether that number is still correct (which it is not) *and* whether you agree with the underlying principle. In that sense, it's probably not a bad thing.

But even with this expanded result, over the last thirty years (heck, forty years), we have only ratified one new amendment to the constitution. Even this one that was ratified is mostly trivial anyway (does not allow approved salary increases for representatives to take place until the next term), and it was authored over 200 years before it was eventually ratified. Two proposed amendments were passed by Congress in the 70s (Equal Rights Amendment, DC Voting Rights Amendment), but they were not ratified by the states. Whatever time frame you calculate for replacing the constitution, we basically have not lived up to Jefferson's charge, and using a nearest round number instead of a more exact number won't change that.

We are so far removed from having a constitutional convention, I don't even know if we'd be capable of competently drafting a new constitution right now. Not that we shouldn't still make one, but we'd basically do a mediocre job because too many people are absorbed in political battle lines to see the bigger picture. I think we *could* successfully replace the Electoral College with a popular vote, but I don't expect us to have the imagination to accomplish more changes -- but at least if we had a convention, we would have a collective conversation that could add new ideas, that we'd better recognize that the "founding fathers" were human beings (who accomplished something fairly extraordinary) instead of infallible leaders, and that we not feel beholden to the rules written by a bunch of dead guys.

User avatar
Locoluis
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:30 pm UTC
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Locoluis » Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:24 pm UTC

Oh, yeah, xorg.conf

I've been fairly used to it, since I tend to collect old hardware (that I usually got for free). In fact, I freaked out when I got a newer Ubuntu that didn't include it or let me create one automagically.

I've never had a Linux distro that correctly detected my monitors, so I have to fill in the HorizSync and VertRefresh by hand.

Earlier this year I bought a Genius Mousepen 8x6", and I had to fill information on xorg.conf in order to make it work.
Sueños del Sur - A webcomic about four siblings, their family, friends, adventures and dreams.
http://sds.lgm.cl/

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 797
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby rhomboidal » Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:22 pm UTC

I get the sneaking feeling that Windows and Mac OS are going to use this graph as the centerpiece of future marketing campaigns.

TexasToast
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 4:09 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby TexasToast » Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:31 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:It has been edited 18 times in 224 years

It took me a moment, but I see what you did there.

Oktalist wrote:Spare a thought for those who have tried to edit sendmail configs.

THIS. Especially while under the stress of having been blacklisted and trying to fix the problem for an entire organization.

User avatar
CatCube
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:28 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby CatCube » Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:05 pm UTC

This reminds me of the time I tried to get Linux to work. It was about 11 years ago now, when I was in my sophomore year in college. I decided, "Hey, I like to fuck around with computers, and this OS is for people who like to fuck around with computers! Besides, everyone says it's more stable than Windows, and I won't have to reboot every couple of days."

After getting it set up, and finding that I couldn't even log in to the computer because it decided to pick a weird resolution, so only the upper-left portion of the login screen showed up on my monitor (I could just see the upper-left corner of the login dialog), and trying to play with it for three days, I found out that by "fuck around with computers" I meant that I like to y'know, actually do things with my computer, and not play around with configurations all day. I went back to the Windows partition, where I could actually use applications, even with the instability.

I've heard that it's now a lot better, but frankly, so is Windows. I just don't see the benefit of trying to relearn how the programmers of my OS think. Plus, discovering Raymond Chen's weblog, and learning that a huge fraction of Windows problems are from horrendously written third-party programs/shell extensions, my user experience has gotten better by making me more choosey about what I install.

User avatar
tetsujin
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby tetsujin » Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:13 pm UTC

As a Linux fan I think I tend to have this knee-jerk reaction against stuff that's critical of Linux and favorable toward Windows or whatever... I guess when I sort that out and approach the subject with clarity, I'd say I like Linux despite issues like these. I do think the situation has improved over the years, which is something at least. :)
---GEC
I want to create a truly new command-line shell for Unix.
Anybody want to place bets on whether I ever get any code written?

Koyaanisqatsi
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:11 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Koyaanisqatsi » Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:37 pm UTC

Kaelin wrote:
I'm going nuts trying to figure out why he picked nineteen years, instead of some more natural-seeming number.


[I'm going to start with this quote's concern and sort of drift from there.]

It was set as the period of time that it was believed to take for half of those of voting age (or perhaps half of those who had the right to vote) to die off, and that 19 happened to be the nearest integer of years. Given the changes to the voting population over time, that choice of 19 years would be ~30 years nowadays (at least if we control for generation bulges/busts). A casual Internet search actually suggested that Jefferson had calculated his figure to be 18 years + 8 months but decided to round up to 19 to make things nicer. In some respects the result is annoying, but by it being an "odd" sounding figure, it sort of begs you to understand *why* the 19 came up, and when you understand why he uses it, it makes it easier for you re-evaluate whether that number is still correct (which it is not) *and* whether you agree with the underlying principle. In that sense, it's probably not a bad thing.

But even with this expanded result, over the last thirty years (heck, forty years), we have only ratified one new amendment to the constitution. Even this one that was ratified is mostly trivial anyway (does not allow approved salary increases for representatives to take place until the next term), and it was authored over 200 years before it was eventually ratified. Two proposed amendments were passed by Congress in the 70s (Equal Rights Amendment, DC Voting Rights Amendment), but they were not ratified by the states. Whatever time frame you calculate for replacing the constitution, we basically have not lived up to Jefferson's charge, and using a nearest round number instead of a more exact number won't change that.

We are so far removed from having a constitutional convention, I don't even know if we'd be capable of competently drafting a new constitution right now. Not that we shouldn't still make one, but we'd basically do a mediocre job because too many people are absorbed in political battle lines to see the bigger picture. I think we *could* successfully replace the Electoral College with a popular vote, but I don't expect us to have the imagination to accomplish more changes -- but at least if we had a convention, we would have a collective conversation that could add new ideas, that we'd better recognize that the "founding fathers" were human beings (who accomplished something fairly extraordinary) instead of infallible leaders, and that we not feel beholden to the rules written by a bunch of dead guys.

I'd like to input commentary.

When the Constitution was written, it was a long time ago. Industries were small and specific, and payment meant the direct production of gold pieces. There was no public plumbing, or public much of anything. It was a lot different then. But nowadays, we have corporations, bureaucracies, etc. It's a lot different now.

I don't know a lot about legal things, but I can tell you one thing: the Constitution means little to nothing. A lot of people think that it's the go-to guide, the bottom line for dealing with things in America, but it doesn't mean very much at all. Our country is not run on the Constitution, it's run on reams and reams of files, each with 10 physical and electronic copies, Supreme Court decisions, interpretations of the Constitution, etc. The Constitution was written in old, romantic, and ambiguous language, and it's not good enough for today's legal world of specific, well-defined papers that have to be devoid of loopholes. We haven't changed the Constitution itself because it's something for people to believe in, like it gives them their rights or something. The general public would be very against changing it, and I think most people are fairly satisfied with its construction and don't want a lot of changes, or even amendments. Also, it would be extremely controversial what we should put in it, and in today's world, it just wouldn't be easy. It's like my dad said when we were at Mount Rushmore. They would never make that today. Who would they carve into it? The debate would be so fierce that it could never get done!

But I think that we're getting too obsessed with these things. Electoral college is not terribly out of proportion, and government isn't the most important thing to worry about to help us with our problems. We need to forget about politics and just deal with ourselves.

That is all I have to say.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Copper Bezel » Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:04 pm UTC

I loled, but I'm not sure that I'm cool enough to do so. I only switched to Linux three years ago and haven't ever actually had to open Xorg.conf.

gnoitall
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 1:37 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby gnoitall » Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:11 pm UTC

Oktalist wrote:Spare a thought for those who have tried to edit sendmail configs.

Aaaaugh! I was feelin' all smug and happy, taking great joy in actually enjoying hand-tailoring assorted X-related config files.

And then you made me flash back to the worst config-editing episode of my life. Death is too good for whoever designed that hideous malformed abomination.

joeyadams
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:01 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby joeyadams » Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:45 pm UTC

Keith Packard gave an interesting talk about the X server development process in linux.conf.au 2011:

http://blip.tv/linuxconfau/changing-the-x-server-development-process-for-fun-and-profit-4745824

To summarize: the development process was originally: anyone with commit access could merge code onto master. Now, only one person, the "release manager" may commit to master, and only sufficiently-reviewed patches may be committed. This does slow down the development process, but it keeps the master branch in far better shape and helps Xorg release on time (see the graphs).

As a user, I find Xorg to be more stable now than it was a few years ago. I haven't had to edit xorg.conf in a long time. Then again, I have an Intel chipset. Other users may have different experiences.

User avatar
neoliminal
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:39 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby neoliminal » Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:56 pm UTC

1. Install Ubuntu
2. Install OSX Pack.
3. Click "yes" a lot.

Forget I know where the xorg.conf file is.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0073YYXRC
Read My Book. Cost less than coffee. Will probably keep you awake longer.
[hint, scary!]

compro01
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby compro01 » Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:40 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:In regards to the Constitution, ours seems to be working pretty well as it is...


other than the couple thousand pages* of interpretation that has built up over the centuries which you'll need to read to actually know what your laconic constitution actually means at present.

*Constitutional Law, Cases and Materials, 13th edition, 2076 pages.

sippawitz
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:09 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby sippawitz » Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:40 am UTC

*wanders in looking for answers*

nope

*shrug*

*wanders back out*

(dammit man, I'm a scientist)

null1024
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:20 am UTC
Location: About 4.91E11 feet from the sun.
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby null1024 » Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:30 am UTC

Jeez, I haven't had to open xorg.conf in forever now. Last time was when dealing with a Matrox card in a machine cobbled out of older parts while trying to get Ubuntu on it, and another situation with a Matrox card where I was trying to get dual monitors to work [I never did ;-;].

On the other hand, none of my main machines have had any xorg issues to deal with [Intel video tends to not have that on Linux, so no poking around needed :P], except for my netbook not having hardware acceleration in Linux [so I run Win 7 on it, unlike every other computer in the house, as it has an ATI video chip, which last time I checked, didn't have stable Linux drivers, kept crashing if I didn't use the default VESA settings which worked flawlessly otherwise].
Image

Rakshasa
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:12 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Rakshasa » Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:10 am UTC

Editing X11.conf during the days of manually editing modeline's... The horror.

jbo5112
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:35 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby jbo5112 » Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:31 am UTC

big boss wrote:So if I'm understanding wiki correctly, you used to need to need to edit that file to get displays on 2 monitors? Is it that much of a headache?
You used to need to edit that file to get 1 display to work correctly, and you could even lose the use of your keyboard and mouse. If you weren't careful, you could overdrive and fry an old monitor. Of course, you wouldn't get to that step until after you compiled your kernel. Everything would pay off when it ran at least 2-3x as fast as windows and only needed to reboot as often as you lost power. My roommate's 486-66 w/ 8MB RAM on Linux could at times outrun my PII-300 w/ 128MB RAM & 10K HDD on WinNT.

Unless you're wanting to do something that Windows won't let you do, it's not much worse than any other config file, and there are tools to help you get started that have been around quite a long time (15+ years). Telling X11 how to best run my old CRT at 1920x1440 @78.6Hz, was a pain, but much better than windows showing me a 70Hz strobe.

Turing Machine
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 5:48 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Turing Machine » Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:51 am UTC

compro01 wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:In regards to the Constitution, ours seems to be working pretty well as it is...


other than the couple thousand pages* of interpretation that has built up over the centuries which you'll need to read to actually know what your laconic constitution actually means at present.

*Constitutional Law, Cases and Materials, 13th edition, 2076 pages.


So, you agree completely. Good to know.

jbo5112
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:35 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby jbo5112 » Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:56 am UTC

gnoitall wrote:
Oktalist wrote:Spare a thought for those who have tried to edit sendmail configs.

Aaaaugh! I was feelin' all smug and happy, taking great joy in actually enjoying hand-tailoring assorted X-related config files.

And then you made me flash back to the worst config-editing episode of my life. Death is too good for whoever designed that hideous malformed abomination.

Since the sendmail config is turing complete, maybe we could force the designers to write a config that takes the computer hardware specs from shipping confirmations whenever you buy a computer, and writes the xorg.conf file.

Soma
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:53 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Soma » Thu Oct 13, 2011 7:10 am UTC

Threads like these always make me happy to be a windows user. Sure, its crap, but damn it works all the f*cking time. Seriously. Installing an OS where you have to edit config files just to be able to use the mouse (yeah yeah) cannot be good. Ever.

Yu_p
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:00 am UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Yu_p » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:36 am UTC

Soma wrote:Threads like these always make me happy to be a windows user. Sure, its crap, but damn it works all the f*cking time. Seriously. Installing an OS where you have to edit config files just to be able to use the mouse (yeah yeah) cannot be good. Ever.
Try a live version on a USB stick or, safer, in a virtual machine. You'd be surprised, how easy it is to start with Ubuntu.

However, if you're picky about reproducing behaviour, you have become accustomed to, and trying to utilize the freedoms the OS gives, you'll quickly be into shell scripting, editing config files and ultimately breaking your installation. Then again, linux makes it pretty easy to set up backups of the OS' state (if you know, you should do so (as I do) and are not too lazy (which I am)). And most certainly the program data is more sanely structured in your home directory on Linux than on Windows (where programs put their data whereever they want). Not to mention, that linux is significantly more economic about disk usage, which might be particularily interesting on Notebooks with SSDs.

To be sure though, I'm actually a Windows user. Whenever I tried using Linux, I utterly failed, because I did just too much. I liked many concepts (e.g. symlinks), but I ended up doing too much to be productive in my actual work.

As for the speed comparison... All the sluggishness of my current Windows 7 installation is thanks to third party software. When I boot in safemode, everything is perfectly snappy. When I run normal mode for some days without rebooting, especially when using the "wrong" software in between, than it takes a second just to switch to another window. Sadly, the list of "wrong" applications includes a majority of games and generally anything involved with DRM, especially when the latter requires to install a systemwide active driver for hindering the start of legally purchased games (while - ironically - illegally downladed versions most likely are cracked not to suffer this hindrance). Also these "protection" measures sometimes are the only reason for not being able to play the game in Linux with Wine (though even without it might not be trivial).

Anyway, abut xorg.conf... I think, whenever I thought, I had to edit it, it turned out, that I had read outdates suggestions.

Alltat
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Alltat » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:40 am UTC

dysprog wrote:5 years ago...
Installing dual monitors on windows xp
1) re boot
2) fiddle with some graphical configuration tools for 5 mins.

Installing dual monitors in Windows 7:
1) Plug in both monitors
2) Pick a resolution for each (if you want different ones, otherwise skip this step).
3) Decide which one is left and which one is right by drag-and-drop.

DexterF
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby DexterF » Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:15 am UTC

xorg.conf is ok. X11 is from a user persepctive, tho the code needs to lose some dead wood from what I hear.

What totally is NOT ok are the drivers. What works best for me are NVidia binary, and the "free as free speech" zealots can bicker shake their fists all they want I need software that gets the job done.

Well, not that NV is big at hiding essential settings in odd labeled settings as I found out the other day:
http://nvidia-linux.blogspot.com/2011/07/forcing-proper-refresh-rates.html

But then I moved to an intel platform with that HTPC. It took me the better part of summer to get the oh so open intel video working as supposed. It completely ignores custom Modelines in xorg.conf, it sees only half of the modes in EDID, I needed to disable vsync to enable vsync (!) and to get halfway decent new drivers I had to use debian testing for no other dist had v2.15+.
(Later I tinkered in 2.16 and Mesa 7.11)

I sometimes envy the windows people how the just download the latest driver, install that and are done.

(In fact, moving that whole HTPC to Win7 would have been a lot easier, but hey, I'm a nerd.)

If you think xorg.conf is in any way hard try and: downmix 5.1 to 2.0 with center raised and chain a compressor and limiter behind that. (Add pulseaudio if you hate yourself.)

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5448
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:59 am UTC

Alltat wrote:
dysprog wrote:5 years ago...
Installing dual monitors on windows xp
1) re boot
2) fiddle with some graphical configuration tools for 5 mins.

Installing dual monitors in Windows 7:
1) Plug in both monitors
2) Pick a resolution for each (if you want different ones, otherwise skip this step).
3) Decide which one is left and which one is right by drag-and-drop.

Installing arbitrarily many monitors on a Mac, since there was hardware to do so in 1987: same as above.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
FrobozzWizard
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:01 pm UTC

Not even close to the worst config

Postby FrobozzWizard » Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:52 pm UTC

Things have gotten noticeably better over the last few years: Xorg now detects monitor properties like horizontal refresh, can choose reasonably sane defaults without any configuration whatsoever, and has actively made changes to make the config easier to understand and make changes to without breaking X entirely.

A parent poster was right that there are far worse configs out there, sendmail being one of the most notorious - it makes regex-heavy Perl look like pseudocode.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: 0963: "X11"

Postby cerbie » Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:59 pm UTC

big boss wrote:So if I'm understanding wiki correctly, you used to need to need to edit that file to get displays on 2 monitors? Is it that much of a headache?
Two? I still need to go to a distro that makes a proper xorg.conf, edit it correctly, and then drop it into a new distro, for one monitor on a few PCs. On one I have to do that to get decent performance and features, because the autoconfig won't let the hardware OpenGL work...and that's so much better than it was even a year ago it's not funny (no display, but no conf file, and no utility that would make one :evil:; oh, and OpenGL would occasionally cause a black screen and require an X restart), which was still better than when manually adding modelines was required (it's connected via DVI...why do I need this?), and when having a 3 or more button mouse meant having to manually edit it, or that buggy time when Xorg was new, and certain USB mice needed to use evdev, but evdev would commonly cause kernel panics...oh and back when you never knew which set of mouse or power settings were the ones that actually controlled their respective behaviors (the DEs? A misc. running service? Xorg.conf? Gotta try them all!). The best, which still happens, but very rarely, is when X thinks it is working, or hard locks, and your system has no usable video, but otherwise seems to be working fine, yet X has a monopoly on keyboard input, so you have to manually reset the PC.

...yes, I got a nice chuckle out of the comic.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests