On Tuesday 08 May 2007 18:39, Christian Perrier wrote: > It is perfectly obvious for me that such things should be activated > only for systems that support them. Good. So, how do we detect this? > It is also perfectly obvious that nice boot environments tend to hide > information (this is indeed why they're nice). However, who *really* > uses that information in normal situations? I sometimes _do_ spot issues caused by e.g. upgrades by glancing at console output during boot. > It is my understading that all such utilities offer a way to disable > the cute graphics/colors/whatever when needed (for instance when the > kernel crashes just like 2.6.20 crashes on my system as it seems). Sure. But for me personally the "cute" graphics do not add _any_ value, so I still don't want them. > So, why not offer them as easily as possible to our users? Which > means, yes, activate them by default. That is certainly more marketing > stuff than deeply useful stuff but marketing and appealing > presentation also counts. For a certain subgroup of our target audience... > So, what is your position about installing usplash with the desktop > task? I have no big problems with that as that is exactly the subgroup that may appreciate this. But that still leaves the question of how to detect systems that do not support it.
Description: PGP signature