Bug#681781: dummy: Please include sample xorg.conf
Michal Suchanek, le Mon 07 Jan 2013 15:13:27 +0100, a écrit :
> Excerpts from Samuel Thibault's message of Mon Jan 07 15:01:28 +0100 2013:
> > Michal Suchanek, le Mon 07 Jan 2013 14:38:13 +0100, a écrit :
> > > Excerpts from Samuel Thibault's message of Mon Jan 07 14:24:24 +0100 2013:
> > > > Michal Suchanek, le Mon 07 Jan 2013 14:01:35 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > > Excerpts from Samuel Thibault's message of Mon Jan 07 13:40:50 +0100 2013:
> > > > > > Michal Suchanek, le Mon 07 Jan 2013 13:33:11 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > > > > How are these devices not configured?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Err, aren't you taking this thread for another one? See the subject,
> > > > > > this is about providing a sample xorg.conf. I'm here saying there
> > > > > > is no need for input sections, since they are already automatically
> > > > > > configured.
> > > > >
> > > > > And I am saying that there *is* need for input sections to prevent them
> > > > > from being automatically configured.
> > > >
> > > > Ooops, sorry, I hadn't understood that input devices were not desired in
> > > > this bug report.
> > > >
> > > > I'm however wondering how this use case differs from simply using Xvfb.
> > >
> > > Xvfb is deprecated, bitrotten, does not support xrandr and other
> > > extensions, ..
> >
> > Could it perhaps be replaced by a mere shell script which invokes Xorg,
> > giving it the sample xorg.conf you provided? That'd be a way easier
> > upgrade path for users than knowing about the dummy driver etc.
>
> For that the sample config has to live somewhere. It won't live in Xvfb
> package because while it's deprecated upstream it's not a reason for
> Debian to remove it. Or is it?
It can be a reason for removing it. Or better, replacing it with the
proposed script. That said, the xorg.conf would better be maintained
under the xorg umbrella, officially replacing Xvfb.
Samuel
Reply to: