My first DontZap use case while testing F11 beta

[Ralf Corsepius]

David wrote:
> On 4/8/2009 12:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> David wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2009 11:25 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>> David wrote:
> 
>>>>> Said more simply? This discussion is on the wrong list. You're
>>>>> talking to
>>>>> the wrong people. Actually it looks more like you are talking to
>>>>> yourselves.
>>>> Not quite: Setting up a distro and preparing packages to include them
>>>> into a distro is a bit more than blindly following "upstreams".
> 
>>>> It also means package maintainers to be "listening" to their
>>>> "user-base", to communicate their user-base's concerns upstream and to
>>>> deviate from upstream when necessary.
> 
> 
>>> This discussion has me thinking about the last time I used C-A-B. And
>>> quite
>>> honestly I can't recall the last time. Certainly not recently.
>> As far as I am concerned:
>> - Ca. 4 weeks ago, when trying to get my netbook working with an
>> external monitor
>> - Today, when something, I don't know, crashed X and left me with an
>> entirely black screen.
> 
> 
>>> I do understand that some users have problems and that some users need
>>> this.
>>> However the way I see it is that the change has been made and will not be
>>> reverting.
> 
>>> Which means one of two things.
> 
>>> Learn to live with the change. Or you change it back yourself.
>> Or ...
>> - exchange upstream
>> - exchange the fedora packager
>> - switch the distro.
>> - fork the distro (This change alone is easy to patch).
> 
>> I think it would be appropriate to have FESCo interfere and let them
>> vote on this matter.
> 
>>> Seems simple
>>> enough. One little change. I change many things from the defaults.
>> With each fedora release, I increasing change more. I am seriously
>> asking myself why I am using a distro which is increasingly divering
>> from my needs, and which I experience to be increasingly less usable
>> wrt. certain aspects.
> 
> 
> "switch the distro" won't work. All are going this way.

You might want to have a second glance - SuSE Factory has this:

  --- xorg-server-1.6.0/hw/xfree86/common/xf86Config.c.orig 
2009-02-28 20:29:42.000000000 +0100
+++ xorg-server-1.6.0/hw/xfree86/common/xf86Config.c    2009-02-28 
20:30:44.000000000 +0100
@@ -734,7 +734,7 @@ static OptionInfoRec FlagOptions[] = {
    { FLAG_DONTVTSWITCH,         "DontVTSwitch", 
OPTV_BOOLEAN,
         {0}, FALSE },
    { FLAG_DONTZAP,              "DontZap", 
OPTV_BOOLEAN,
-       {0}, TRUE },
+       {0}, FALSE },
    { FLAG_ZAPWARNING,            "ZapWarning", 
OPTV_BOOLEAN,
         {0}, FALSE },
    { FLAG_DONTZOOM,             "DontZoom", 
OPTV_BOOLEAN,


 > So your, and the others, options, are the same as when this started.
Correct - my opinion still is: upstream's decision is silly.

Also, provided the hazzle this issue has caused, I am deeply convinced 
the change would have been reverted in Fedora, if Fedora package 
maintainer wasn't a RH employee.