On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 10:52:11PM +0000, Wulfy wrote: > Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 11:31:32AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > >Of course, some things simply cannot be done without a GUI. Or at least > >they cannot be done efficiently. > I've seen people before say that there are things that can't be done in > a GUI, but most of the GUIs seem to be crippled in one way or another > that is not inherent in their "GUIness". > > Can you give me an example of something that can't be done (even if only > efficiently) in a properly written GUI with a working X Window System? I > accept that X may have to be restarted after the action.
I think the question got turned around. I don't doubt that it is possible to make a GUI do anything that a text-mode app can do; it may even be possible to do it as securely. What I'm curious about is Roberto's claim that "some things cannot be done without a GUI..." Like what? Limit it to things that need to be done with somewhat-root privilages (i.e. not viewing the night sky). I'm really interested in this. If there's something that root has to do that requires a GUI and hense requires X, then I better start writing a non-GUI app to do it. Thanks, Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]