Re: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
On 2001.03.05 19:06:16 +0400 Pixel wrote: Guillaume Rousse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: All drakxtools are stateless, they always start with no configuration defined, making very difficult to adjust a running configuration. You have to remember exactly what you entered last time, which is rather easy for mouse setting, but far less for X configuration :-) Capacity to read present configuration, either from plain configuration files, or from specific tool file, would be a great improvement. they do read existing config files. The problem is what to keep. XFdrake should at least retain monitor and graphic card type, as the lists are rather long, and uneasy to scroll in console mode. MouseDrake should retain mouse type. Etc... Where is the problem ? -- Guillaume Rousse Murphy's law : If anything can go wrong, it will. O'Tool's commentary : Murphy was an optimist.
Re: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
Guillaume Rousse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: XFdrake should at least retain monitor and graphic card type, as the lists are rather long, and uneasy to scroll in console mode. MouseDrake should retain mouse type. Etc... Where is the problem ? for complicated config files, you can't verify easily if the config will work, or at least has a chance to work. Aka, it will keep broken stuff. For mousedrake, there's no pb :)
RE: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
Guillaume Rousse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: XFdrake should at least retain monitor and graphic card type, as the lists are rather long, and uneasy to scroll in console mode. MouseDrake should retain mouse type. Etc... Where is the problem ? for complicated config files, you can't verify easily if the config will work, or at least has a chance to work. Aka, it will keep broken stuff. For mousedrake, there's no pb :) If user was consistently using tools, config file is parseable. If user handedited it, at least display a warning that config could not be parsed and is set to default. Currently it is (exactly in case of XFdrake/drakmouse) too easy to ruin your configuration beyond ability to run tools again to correct it :-( -andrej
Re: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Guillaume Rousse wrote: All drakxtools are stateless, they always start with no configuration defined, making very difficult to adjust a running configuration. You have to remember exactly what you entered last time, which is rather easy for mouse setting, but far less for X configuration :-) Capacity to read present configuration, either from plain configuration files, or from specific tool file, would be a great improvement. Definitely not from a specific tool file - this would cause hand-edited changes to the config files to be lost when the drakxtools were used. Michael
Re: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
On Monday 05 March 2001 09:26, you wrote: On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Guillaume Rousse wrote: All drakxtools are stateless, they always start with no configuration defined, making very difficult to adjust a running configuration. You have to remember exactly what you entered last time, which is rather easy for mouse setting, but far less for X configuration :-) Capacity to read present configuration, either from plain configuration files, or from specific tool file, would be a great improvement. Definitely not from a specific tool file - this would cause hand-edited changes to the config files to be lost when the drakxtools were used. Michael If drakxtools used the same configuration scripts which linuxconfig uses it would be alot easier wouldent it? (please dont forget to add CHAP support for any connection to ISP's (ISDN too) GRIN thanks dave
Re: [Cooker] drakxtool improvment suggestion
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Michael Brown wrote: On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Guillaume Rousse wrote: All drakxtools are stateless, they always start with no configuration defined, making very difficult to adjust a running configuration. You have to remember exactly what you entered last time, which is rather easy for mouse setting, but far less for X configuration :-) Capacity to read present configuration, either from plain configuration files, or from specific tool file, would be a great improvement. Definitely not from a specific tool file - this would cause hand-edited changes to the config files to be lost when the drakxtools were used. Michael Every tool must analyze current configuration and start with it. In no way should specific file be used. I know at least one such case, when system configuration tool used own database (that was supposed to be synced to real configuration) - it was real pain in the ... -andrej
