From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D1FC138247 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 23:26:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C7F4E0ACF; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 23:26:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.96]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9525E0AC5 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 23:26:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.72]) by qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id naeU1m0011ZXKqc59bS7nW; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 23:26:07 +0000 Received: from ajax ([24.11.47.14]) by omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id nbS61m0110JMh7c3hbS7gL; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 23:26:07 +0000 Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2013 18:25:53 -0500 From: Frank Peters To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: USB Scanner Problems with Newer Kernels/Libusb Message-Id: <20131109182553.e20f212f81585d215108f553@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20131108222553.33af27243ad5aa2411c3f0ff@comcast.net> <20131109114529.f29b71e10f00f6a8b170d0e8@comcast.net> <20131109204021.GA28493@crud> <20131109163813.e0b90b87aefd17c03054af8c@comcast.net> <20131109221148.GA26666@crud> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.3.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1384039567; bh=Q2D0nBGut+e3tF9PArHnjREHJRf9RWIscEbbjfj+Dvs=; h=Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Mime-Version: Content-Type; b=B6nnBqm5iYOtSc1e8EmZdaYqASyr7DSp6r6EhcWnXPlRYpMdQicQY9Damw7DndrXL DJ+tQsZEj3idCNfcbZf/D5hirNRVrULVnaZYbALuR3TkWjgLCgmfocTv57Z8X3Lwvu Xv8x/s+2pete+NFiLrM6pQvzVMxOXZKaLOBK2eNDMi/n7xl64gRYr/i1e2oTLoizKr +7QEPLljv9La3mEnIMCzCeCkKjjqtgAIUEfibM+C7HfwYx0c6AzzNCxd9W3JVRTaH0 zo28l69f6IoQekOtp5vMHnNUl9MzrjK7K8XmgQ5diA1vdR+V7hOh4nWsN6r4IigrAh MeCdncuRgGAZA== X-Archives-Salt: 601cc1c3-7163-486f-a63e-ada5ac03942a X-Archives-Hash: 7ed2c891355028bc889c33bc5cb6ec11 On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 14:57:26 -0800 Mark Knecht wrote: > I sort of feel that the kernel will always be > the kernel and everything that gets piled on top sort of seems to take > care of itself in the end. If freedesktop.org goes down a path where > it gets too complicated then I believe\think\hope some other group > will step forward quietly, fork that portion > Yes, the kernel is fine. But I need/want a GUI, not a DE, just a GUI -- and that's the problem because freedesktop.org is the only game in town and whatever they do everyone must do. Coupled with the fact that graphics processors are all tightly controlled by Nvidia, Radeon, etc. we are destined for an extremely monolithic Linux graphical environment in the future. Fork? Who's gonna take on that challenge? It seems that a handful of developers, with their own special and exclusionary agenda, will control the Linux GE for all time. Frank Peters