[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: KVM FYI



On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 13:52:12 -0700
"Daniel B. Thurman" <dant cdkkt com> wrote:

> Sean, this message is NOT directed at you.  It is intended to
> be directed at *all* developers that have an 'attitude' with
> regard to what goes into Linux.

Lol, no worries.

> =====================================================
> Previously, I had said that my Belkin KVM worked when
> using .proto=imp but alas that is NOT the case.  I am
> now testing the .proto=bare case but wont know till I
> check it out every few days switch between computers.
> (The problem (jumping cursors) does not break right away
> but it *does* break in the case of imp.)

In all likelyhood you will find this works well for you and thus
you have a workable solution.

> 
> I also want to add a comment on what Tom is trying to say
> (although I don't want to put words in his mouth) to those
> of you too lazy to implement a fix for issues like this:

You make a bit of a leap saying people are too lazy to implement
a fix.  The open source process works because people who care
about an issue take the time to fix it.   This means if you care
about an issue you'd better be prepared to be part of the solution
or wait until someone who cares enough to fix it, does so.
If you call other people lazy because they won't fix something
for you, then you've failed to understand the process.

> "Microstiff is probably happy and gleeful that idiot programmers
> of Linux just don't get it from a business perpective.  M$ will
> continue to RULE the desktop because they attend to the details
> and FIX things that support OLD hardware including the "lowly"
> Belkin KVM!  THEY ARE THE PROFESSIONALS AND WILL CONTINUE TO
> DOMINATE THE DESKTOP!!!"

*shrug*   Linux is still working up to a point where it can compete on
the desktop level in all situations.   It has the disadvantage of many 
hardware developers only targetting Windows and making sure their 
hardware works there.  Not really the case with the issue we're discussing 
but I don't know many people that think Linux is poised to take over the 
desktop any time soon.   It's not a problem of attitude, it's a problem of 
resources and time.   Freaking out because we're not there today doesn't 
help anything.   Working towards constant improvement is the only 
course.  Sometimes, as in the case of a new kernel, there is a regression
introduced when some infrastructure (designed to make things better
in the long run) is added.    Any one who installs a 2.6 kernel today
is an early adopter and had better have a pretty good tolerance level
for some issues like these.

> I hope that I have been able to get your blood boiling red hot?  Mine
> is.  It is *not* a good attitude that old hardware will no longer be
> supported or comments like: "Get new hardware, its too old", or "hey!
> its not MY problem. Fix it yourself!"  There are *many* reasons why
> old hardware is still around and a LOT is because of economics, even
> in the richest country in the world (there are still poor people in
> it).  I want to add that I saw a URL somewhere that there is an
> organization
> that restores OLD computers so that poor people, schools, the needy
> whatever can use them and the plan was to install LINUX on it!  I
> *don't*
> think it is reasonable for them to: 'Sorry, get NEW hardware." attitude
> will fly here :-(  Not that they will necessairly get a KVM -- but hey!
> WHO KNOWS ;-)

Maybe I missed somebody saying "Get new hardware"?  Instead people
gave a solution that solved the problem of the mouse not working.
It wasn't a perfect solution but should be good enough for most people
until the problem is solved.   The OP appears to be in a situation where
wheel support is desperately needed in conjuction with KVM access;
unfortunately this is a corner case that still needs some work and I'd
think a solution will emerge at some point.

> Please at MINIMUM to direct people to the right source, links,
> documentation,
> or 'How to do it yourself' so that others with a vested interest might
> be
> able to do something about it because time is cheap for them compared to
> the alternative.

Everyone who responded to this problem seemed to be trying to help
and gave useful information and links.

Cheers,
Sean



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]