[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#346149: marked as done (Add low-priority question to avoid generating xorg.conf, for preseeding)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:02:58 +0100
with message-id <20091128170258.GA9988@patate.is-a-geek.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#346149: Add low-priority question to avoid generating xorg.conf, for preseeding
has caused the Debian Bug report #346149,
regarding Add low-priority question to avoid generating xorg.conf, for preseeding
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
346149: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=346149
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-1
Severity: wishlist

It would be nice if there was a low-priority question "Generate X server
 configuration with debconf?", defaulting to "yes", and generating no
xorg.conf at all if "no".  This would allow preseeders to use "no" and
rely on the X server's automatic detection and configuration logic.

(Eventually the X server's automatic detection and configuration logic
may well be good enough that it could replace the need to generate a
configuration file, but it isn't there yet.)

Thanks,
Josh Triplett

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 1:7.4+2

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 06:34:17 -0700, vagrant@freegeek.org wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 03:50:50PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > It would be nice if there was a low-priority question "Generate X server
> >  configuration with debconf?", defaulting to "yes", and generating no
> > xorg.conf at all if "no".  This would allow preseeders to use "no" and
> > rely on the X server's automatic detection and configuration logic.
> > 
> > (Eventually the X server's automatic detection and configuration logic
> > may well be good enough that it could replace the need to generate a
> > configuration file, but it isn't there yet.)
> 
> Xorg's automatic configuration without an xorg.conf is maybe good enough
> now (using xserver-xorg 1:7.3+10) to consider making this a normal or
> high priority question, and possibly even the default behavior.
> 
dexconf is gone.

Cheers,
Julien

--- End Message ---
Reply to: