On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 01:27:45PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Jim Gettys wrote: > > o someone, somewhere along the line installed gpm on me: this caused > > various trouble in my X hacking along the way. > > > > In general, gpm should *NOT* be the default (if you install an X desktop, > > anyway, which can be used as a signal you aren't likely to want cut and > > paste on the consoles). It only makes interactive behavior of the system > > worse by interposing a user process. > > Jim's convinced me that gpm should not be in standard, the benefits of > not having the repeater going are woth it for all the people who want a > desktop, and it's easy enough to install gpm if you need it. Another > task could also continue to pull it in. Anyway, of all the potato > installs (which all lacked gpm by default), I only got three or four > comments from people who would have preferred it install gpm, and the > potential improvement outweighs that. I've been on the edge of putting it in optional for a while now, if the general consensus is that it should not be standard then my next upload (which should fix the current big bugs, though they are VERY much kernel bugs as well.). Zephaniah E. Hull. (gpm maintainer.) > > -- > see shy jo -- 1024D/E65A7801 Zephaniah E. Hull <warp@babylon.d2dc.net> 92ED 94E4 B1E6 3624 226D 5727 4453 008B E65A 7801 CCs of replies from mailing lists are requested. "Microsoft is a cross between the Borg and the Ferengi. Unfortunately, they use Borg to do their marketing and Ferengi to do their programming." -- Simon Slavin in asr
Attachment:
pgpJawQXCm0jF.pgp
Description: PGP signature