On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 12:11:56PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 04 October 2005 04:56, Daniel Stone wrote: > > To be honest, I don't see the Debconf interface as being valuable. I > > don't think it provides anything over xorg.conf for the average user, > > since you're going to have to be googling it anyway, and ... yeah. I > > just don't see why it would be used at all. The only thing we use it > > for is sudo dpkg-reconfigure -phigh xserver-xorg -> instant config > > regeneration, with full redetection. > > Just that it does not fit your use case, does not mean it is not valuable. > I have used the debconf interface to make minor changes (like increasing > or decreasing default resolution) and have been quite annoyed with > debconf not preserving previous answers for xorg. I don't see how this is any easier than editing the configuration file, still. > Not only is it illogical, it is also inconsistent with how debconf is used > for most other packages. Most other packages don't need such a pathologically insane config file. (Luckily.) > The suggestion to do a full reset for _directly related questions_ if > something is autoprobed sounds like a good one. I'm down with that.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature