Re: all xterms
- To: Debian Developers List <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: all xterms
- From: Tomasz Wegrzanowski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:00:35 +0100
- Message-id: <19991031220035.A308@friko3.onet.pl>
- In-reply-to: <19991031204036.A12588@azure.humbug.org.au>; from email@example.com on Sun, Oct 31, 1999 at 08:40:36PM +1000
- References: <19991030214941.A999@friko3.onet.pl> <19991030214941.A999@friko3.onet.pl> <19991030211013.B8700@ecn.purdue.edu> <19991031105534.A8904@spinnaker.rhein.de> <19991031204036.A12588@azure.humbug.org.au>
On Sun, Oct 31, 1999 at 08:40:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 1999 at 10:55:34AM +0100, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> > On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > The disadvantage of the alternative concept over some sensible-xterm
> > shell script is, that alternatives are static for all users, while
> > sensible-xterm could be used on a per-user basis (with
> > x-terminal-emulator as the fall back).
> Is there any particular reason why the alternatives mechanism couldn't
> simply be fixed so users can select their own alternatives?
alternatives are completely unintuitive, also look at this situation:
user use footerm as his normal xterm. Then he installs barterm and
'export XTERM=barterm' do all the work. After testing he got disliking
barterm so he installs quuxterm and 'export XTERM=quuxterm'. Then
he think quuxterm is also lame and 'export XTERM=footerm'.
How much time would it take by alternatives ???
> Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
> I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
> ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
> results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
> -- Linus Torvalds
And alternatives are EXACTLY too generic, evil and results
with a lot of bugs (symlinks to the void)