| 1 |
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 02:29:41 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> With xorg.conf.d directories now being the preferred configuration |
| 6 |
> method, eselect-opengl now uses that, changing the 20-opengl.conf or |
| 7 |
> whatever file it drops into the xorg.conf.d dir, instead of changing |
| 8 |
> symlinks. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I would hesitate to use the term "preferred configuration." |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Although I am venturing into philosophical areas with this comment, |
| 14 |
Xorg has taken the stance of being very versatile in its configuration |
| 15 |
scheme, and that is how it should be. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
According to the xorg.conf man page: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
"Xorg supports several mechanisms for supplying/obtaining configuration |
| 20 |
and run-time parameters: command line options, environment variables, |
| 21 |
the xorg.conf and xorg.conf.d configuration files, auto-detection, and |
| 22 |
fallback defaults ..." |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
IMO it is an excellent design to allow the user so much choice in handling |
| 25 |
how his X server is configured. To suddenly single out a "preferred" method |
| 26 |
from this versatile approach is a definite injustice. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
But I certainly appreciate the background information on eselect. I haven't |
| 29 |
paid much attention to it because my system has been performing quite well |
| 30 |
over the years (in spite of my deliberate flaunting of convention in many |
| 31 |
areas). Ordinarily I would prefer to avoid such contrivances and rely on |
| 32 |
manual tweaking, but sometimes I just cannot do it all. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Frank Peters |
Archives