Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu's BulletProofX To Be Canned?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ubuntu's BulletProofX To Be Canned?

    Phoronix: Ubuntu's BulletProofX To Be Canned?

    BulletProofX was a less-exposed feature that was introduced with Ubuntu 7.10 as a fail-safe mode when X.Org wasn't able to properly start -- generally caused by improperly installing the ATI/NVIDIA proprietary driver or by incorrectly configuring the xorg.conf. The BulletProofX mode just sets the X server to run at 800 x 600 with 256 colors while showing Ubuntu's displayconfig-gtk utility (another Ubuntu 7.10 feature)...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NjU3Mw

  • #2
    They should seriously take a look at bringing SaX2 over to ubuntu.
    Last edited by deanjo; 07-06-2008, 08:01 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think having a way to recover from broken X is very important for most users -- I can fix my xorg.conf easily, but nobody shouldn't have to do it manually.

      BulletproofX fixed that, and it was pretty cool. I didn't understand if they were canning it, and they have some kind of replacement, or they're just gonna go back to the old "X fails, here you go, have a tty, good luck!", but I hope it's not the latter.

      Just my 2c.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        They should seriously take a look at bring SaX2 over to ubuntu.
        Agreed. Sax2 isn't too powerful. But I haven't seen anything as stable and bulletproof

        Comment


        • #5
          I dislike those automatic features. They are not really helpful for debugging, well maybe for noobs

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kano View Post
            I dislike those automatic features. They are not really helpful for debugging, well maybe for noobs
            How does a configuration wizard impede debugging at all? Nothing is stopping you from going archaic old school if you want.

            Comment


            • #7
              Usually that only happend with gdm and you could disable that feature. But in some cases you even triggered that behaviour by accident and I don't like that. When it is off, you just look into logfile, and do your changes. New X would currently even start when you delete the xorg.conf (just with US keyboards settings) so it is really not critical.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                Usually that only happend with gdm and you could disable that feature. But in some cases you even triggered that behaviour by accident and I don't like that. When it is off, you just look into logfile, and do your changes. New X would currently even start when you delete the xorg.conf (just with US keyboards settings) so it is really not critical.
                You can still do all of that if Sax2 is installed on the system. SaX2 infact provides more logs as to a failure (which often at times are less trivial then the x logs.). It's not like SaX2 automatically makes the need for xorg.conf to disappear. Seriously having to know cli to setup X is a completely backwards way of thinking.

                Comment


                • #9
                  What. the. hell.? I hope they aren't being serious. While some l33t users would appreciate getting dropped to the terminal for poking around and debugging, this is killer for pretty much everybody else. Upgrade it to work with RandR and, um, tell KDE to make a replacement, but keep the thing!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Vadi View Post
                    What. the. hell.? I hope they aren't being serious. While some l33t users would appreciate getting dropped to the terminal for poking around and debugging, this is killer for pretty much everybody else. Upgrade it to work with RandR and, um, tell KDE to make a replacement, but keep the thing!
                    *cough*VESA*cough*no*cough*like*cough*randr*cough*

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Unaddressable bugs?

                      The article mentions "unaddressable bugs" while in effect the original message only says "unaddressed bugs". Big difference. The first suggests that BulletproofX is just a bad idea that can't be made to work while latter only suggests lack of time or support.

                      Personally I've always thought this was a pretty basic feature. Drop anyone who is not an X config wizard into a tty and they will have no idea what to do. Given them same basic VESA support and they'll still be able to Google around for solutions or chat with some more knowledgeable friends for support.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by quintesse View Post
                        The article mentions "unaddressable bugs" while in effect the original message only says "unaddressed bugs".
                        Bad typo, that's what I get for typing a news article when exhausted Fixed now. Thanks.
                        Michael Larabel
                        http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Good. Do you know how many users have come into #compiz-fusion on freenode asking for help because their display is driving at 800x600 and compiz won't work. /var/log/Xorg.0.log shows that it's using the failsafe xorg.conf file and, to make matters worse, /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old also ends up showing /etc/x11/xorg.conf.failsafe. So you then have to walk the user through stopping gdm, logging in at the console, trying to start X, copying a useful Xorg.0.log file to their desktop, and then restarting gdm.

                          This doesn't help anyone, including newbie users.

                          Adam

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            So a tty console is better?

                            I guess it would for you, they wouldn't get to #compiz-fusion in the first place.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, dropping BulletProofX is better for a couple of reasons.

                              A) It forces users to learn something about their system.
                              B) It forces developers to come up with a better solution that the current piece of crap.

                              Adam

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X