Re: Switching g-i from DirectFB to X11 -- specific issues/comments
On Wednesday 24 February 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Could you please establish a normative list of the cursors you're
> using or going to use (which would then include the “wait” one), so
> that we only keep those?
I'm sorry, but I can't. I've simply looked at wht cursors I actually see
when running an install.
I guess it should be possible to derive it from the code of the frontend or
cairo or gtk or whatever is responsible for changing the cursor. But the
window resizing ones are simply not needed because we (currently) don't
have any windows for which we want to allow resizing.
> > The directfb G-I displayed a smaller black arrow, which IMO was more
> > elegant than the one displayed now.
>
> I for one don't care that much; I only picked this theme since
> Josselin mentioned it initially; BTW, there's DMZ-White & DMZ-Black in
> the same (regular deb) package, we probably could arrange something,
> especially if we're going to ship only a few cursors.
I can't be much help here as I'm not a GNOME user, so I'm not familiar with
the themes. I just thought the one used in your first image looked rather
crude.
It would be good if someone who is could try out a few and either pick one
that looks good, or post some screenshots.
> > Keeping the white as option could be useful for e.g. the "dark"
> > theme, but that means we'd need a way to change the cursor.
>
> At (d-i, not udeb-providing-source-package) build time, I assume? In
> both cases, it's just about a link to create before X starts.
No, the theme can be selected using a boot parameter. Try 'theme=dark' with
a Lenny image (also works for the newt frontend). But it is known before X
is started, so changing a symlink or a config file is possible.
Something like the "dark" theme should really also be supported for the
X.Org implementation, but IMO we can leave that until later and ask the
accessibility folks to provide patches for that.
Reply to: