Alan Stern schrieb: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Frank Schaefer wrote: > >> Alan Stern schrieb: >> >>> X11 also is essentially prequisite for making your computer usable. >>> Does that lead you to conclude it should be shipped with the kernel >>> too? >>> >>> Sorry, I don't accept your argument. >>> >>> Alan Stern >>> >> Really ??? So you have never seen Unix-machines without X11 ??? >> > > Sure I have. But not many and not recently. And in any case it's > irrelevant -- I didn't say that all Unix machines need X11; I said that > X11 is essentially prerequisite for making _your_ computer usable. > > Are you claiming that you do run your computer without X11? > > Oh yes, I'm running TWO unix machines without X11 ;). >> Apart from that, I can't see how X11 is related to the >> drivers<->modeswitch topic. >> > > It is an example used to illustrate a point of contention. You really > should not have any trouble understanding the logic behind such > examples. But to help makes things clear, I will simplify the analogy > for you. In paraphrase: > > Frank: Mode-switching code is essential to making the device usable, > just as the driver is. Hence they should be shipped together. > > Alan: X11 is essential to making your computer usable, just as the > kernel is. Hence they should be shipped together. > > If either claim is valid then so is the other, since they share the > same logical form. But the claim about X11 is clearly wrong. > Therefore the corresponding claim about mode-switching is also wrong. > This is basic logic. > No, its WRONG logic, and you know that. Things/cases are NOT IDENTICAL just because they have A SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTE in common. Or do you think a basketball is like an water melon just because they are both round and have the same size ;) ? So stop this weird argumentation. I know what you're trying doing to do here but I'm not going to take part in this game. > >> This kind of argumentation is REALLY weird... >> > > No it isn't. It is in fact quite common. Imagine trying to hold a > discussion if you couldn't cite examples or analogies... > > Alan Stern It's simply a WRONG analogy, because X11 is NOT essentially prerequisite to make unix machines work. It's a very usefull EXTENSION basically for desktop machines. The modeswitch is definitely NOT JUST AN EXTENSION because the device EVEN DOESN'T SHOW UP without it. You should at least recognize this valid agument, but it seems you just don't want. So I will no longer waste my time. Frank -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
