Ubuntu's BulletProofX To Be Canned?

[phoronix]

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

[deanjo]

They should seriously take a look at bringing SaX2 over to ubuntu.

[[Knuckles]]

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.

[some-guy]

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 :)

[Kano]

I dislike those automatic features. They are not really helpful for debugging, well maybe for noobs ;)

[deanjo]

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.

[Kano]

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.

[deanjo]

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.

[Vadi]

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!

[some-guy]

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*
;)

[quintesse]

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.

[Michael]

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.

[adamk]

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

[Vadi]

So a tty console is better?

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

[adamk]

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

[Dr_ST]

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.

In fact, they should take a look at what is done in Mandriva:
- startx (with proprietary driver)
- if that fails, then indicate there is a fallback to the open-source, but less powerfull driver, yes there is a WARNING
- if that still fails, show the log and drop to a console.

And then, you just need to launch drakx11 to reset your configuration, et voilà.

That's the kind of features where there is really a strong need for sharing :D

[Kano]

Btw. did somebody look at the new xorg.conf created on current intrepid? It is absolutely clear that it breaks on many systems because of the fbdev override.

[deanjo]

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

Dropping tools that make setup easier accomplishes:

A) Keeping new users away
B) Gives MS trolls more food
C) Slows down linux adoption


So if your net goal is to hang on or decrease the already minuscule ~1% marketshare linux has on the desktop then by all means scrap every gui tool that allows the layman to setup their system. Just don't ever bitch when a manufacturer or software vender doesn't do squat for linux because instead of spending resources on ~1% the market they decide to focus and deliver 100% of their product that appeals to 99% of the population.

[Kano]

When you look at the mail then you see that they just recreate the xorg.conf with defaults. Thats usually enough as it would even start without xorg.conf in many cases. Just the current default xorg.conf is not that optimial.

[adamk]

Dropping tools that make setup easier accomplishes:

A) Keeping new users away
B) Gives MS trolls more food
C) Slows down linux adoption


So if your net goal is to hang on or decrease the already minuscule ~1% marketshare linux has on the desktop then by all means scrap every gui tool that allows the layman to setup their system. Just don't ever bitch when a manufacturer or software vender doesn't do squat for linux because instead of spending resources on ~1% the market they decide to focus and deliver 100% of their product that appeals to 99% of the population.

Allowing developers to develop hacky workarounds to major problems just results in a piss poor product.

Develop the correct solution and then deploy it. Seriously, all the developers need to do is make sure they back up the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file that shows the actual problem with the driver before starting X with the failsafe xorg.conf file.

Adam

EDIT: As an example of what I'm talking about... There's someone on #compiz-fusion now with a fglrx problem. He starts by saying that he can't get 1920x1200 working with fglrx. He's not even aware that the root of the problem is that BulletProofX kicked in and he's using the failsafe mode, so he doesn't relay that fact to us. It takes a series of questions before I realize that he's running in 800x600 mode and, therefore, fglrx must be failing and BulletProofX has kicked in.

This is what I call an absolutely crappy workaround. I'd rather have it dropped completely, forcing the users to complain to Ubuntu about being left at a TTY, so that the Ubuntu developers actually develop a real solution. In the short term, perhaps linux loses a few newbies... So what? In the long term, we end up with a better product.

[Vadi]

A) It forces users to learn something about their system.

Who the hell wants to learn something about their computer when they just want it to *work*?

Forced education? What are you thinking about? They'll simply unisntall Linux and label it as a failing piece of crap.

[adamk]

Who the hell wants to learn something about their computer when they just want it to *work*?

Forced education? What are you thinking about? They'll simply unisntall Linux and label it as a failing piece of crap.

So we lose a user. And hopefully get enough complaints to have the developers come up with a real solutions. What, exactly, is the problem?

Adam

[Vadi]

We lose a ton of users as it is *with* bulletproofx. For one, they aren't that easy to come by, and two, we'd lose even more.

As for real solutions, those will take years, to come by. With even audio not properly sorted out yet, you can't make such risks with video, which is at an even worse state.

[adamk]

Our concern should be less on converting and keeping users and more on creating a better product. If the product is good enough, we won't lose users.

Anyway, I don't see why it would take years to implement a better solution than BulletProofX when, frankly, a better solution is to make an automatic copy of the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file that shows the problem, rather than simply overwriting it.

Adam

[Kano]

By default you have got one backup as /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old.

[adamk]

Hate to break it to you, but you should check out the number of people whose /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old file is also against /etc/X11/xorg.conf.failsafe. I have yet to see anyone on #compiz-fusion with this problem who had a helpful /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old, so I don't know what BulletProofX is doing, but it's not the right thing :-)

Adam

[Vadi]

Anyway, I don't see why it would take years to implement a better solution than BulletProofX when, frankly, a better solution is to make an automatic copy of the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file that shows the problem, rather than simply overwriting it.

Because it's taken years to make BulletProofX to begin with.

In regards to your ideas of a product, hate to break it to you, and I'm confused as to why aren't you taking this into account, but there is no deadline or wages on this. If nobody wants to do this, nobody will.

Developers should make less buggy code? Well, go ahead and tell them that upfront.

[adamk]

Because it's taken years to make BulletProofX to begin with.

In regards to your ideas of a product, hate to break it to you, and I'm confused as to why aren't you taking this into account, but there is no deadline or wages on this. If nobody wants to do this, nobody will.


And I'm confused why you don't think that Canonical, Novell, and RedHat pay developers, and why you don't think they view their distributions as a "product". Because they do pay develoeprs and, let's face it, linux is a product.

Adam

[Vadi]

Er, because failing drivers and X != distributions?

What you are doing is actively arguing against any kinds of failsaves that the distributions make to make up for the failing state of video, saying that X and driver developers are to make less buggy code.

And lets face it too, it's a damn pitiful product that's failing to get any markshare whatsoever if you take that stance.

[adamk]

No, what I'm doing is actively arguing against BulletProofX because it's a bad hack. Yes, the best solution is truly failsafe X and drivers. That's not gonna happen. A better solution than the current is something like BulletProofX, but that actually backs up the log file showing what the problem is, rather than assuming users would rather continue to run in 800x600 resolution forever, and can therefore make it difficult for a new user (which you seem to be so concerned about) to find the source of the problem, which is what the current "solution" does.

Adam

[Vadi]

So the real issue here is a bug with BulletProofX, it should keep the old log file about.

That's it!

[Kano]

The old file is created by Xorg itself btw. - as soon as you start the xserver the last one gets renamed and a new is written.

[some-guy]

The old file is created by Xorg itself btw. - as soon as you start the xserver the last one gets renamed and a new is written.
So is this what a *proper* setup should do?
- Try to use a fully accelerated driver
- Check to see if it fails
- If it doesn't, leave it alone, otherwise cp /var/log/Xorg.0.log to /var/log/Xorg.0.log.failed
- Make X use VESA, and restart X

Right?

[murisfurder]

I dislike those automatic features. They are not really helpful for debugging, well maybe for noobs ;)

Agreed.

I absolutely fscking HATE bulletproof X. I can't believe it was included to begin with.

The worst part, was that it kept spawning new processes, turning what would be as simple as stopping gdm through init into a task requiring some serious bash foo.

[Vadi]

Hey, I'm sure that thing doesn't come with gentoo or slackware or whatever other non-n00b distro you use. Why does it bother you?

[adamk]

Hey, I'm sure that thing doesn't come with gentoo or slackware or whatever other non-n00b distro you use. Why does it bother you?

Though I don't use Ubuntu any more (due to stupid decisions like BulletProofX), it bothers me that it's included because Ubuntu support sucks and their users end up in #compiz-fusion trying to get their drivers working :-)

Adam

[Vadi]

Of course. Instead of sitting on an 800x600 res troubleshooting, you'd like them to get a terminal so that they have absolutely no idea what to do and boot between windows to troubleshoot?

[adamk]

Of course. Instead of sitting on an 800x600 res troubleshooting, you'd like them to get a terminal so that they have absolutely no idea what to do and boot between windows to troubleshoot?

We've been over this. I'd like BulletProofX to do the right thing and backup a copy of the helpful /var/log/Xorg.0.log file.

Barring that, then yes I'd prefer that a few users get offended by being dropped to a TTY, complain to Ubuntu, and a better solution get developed as a result.

Adam

[Vadi]

Chances are, they won't complain. They'll simply go away.

[adamk]

I guess we just have different ideas on mind for linux. I see it as a tool I can use. You see it as a tool everyone should use.

Adam

[Vadi]

Not 'should' but 'should be able to'. Because I then get better support for this tool, and you do too. And you paradoxically seem to be keen on making it not usable, while helping people with it anyway.

[adamk]

Not 'should' but 'should be able to'. Because I then get better support for this tool, and you do too. And you paradoxically seem to be keen on making it not usable, while helping people with it anyway.

I don't believe that all tools should be able to be used by everyone. Cars are tools but, frankly, some people are so stupid they shouldn't be allowed to drive them :-)

Adam

[murisfurder]

Hey, I'm sure that thing doesn't come with gentoo or slackware or whatever other non-n00b distro you use. Why does it bother you?

No, I've been using ubuntu since Ubuntu 5.04 (Hoary Hedgehog).

You don't seem to understand that "usability" does not equal "ease of use"

Yes, bulletproofX made it easier to solve problems IN SOME CASES, but overall it created the same kind of hard to solve problems that made me move away from windows to begin with.

Also it makes it harder to provide support to new users, because it makes things harder to dagnose.

We've been over this. I'd like BulletProofX to do the right thing and backup a copy of the helpful /var/log/Xorg.0.log file.

Barring that, then yes I'd prefer that a few users get offended by being dropped to a TTY, complain to Ubuntu, and a better solution get developed as a result.

Adam

I agree on this one.

I guess we just have different ideas on mind for linux. I see it as a tool I can use. You see it as a tool everyone should use.

Adam

As a follow up to what adam said, You should stop thinking about what some "hypthetical" users might do once they run into a simple issue.

Just for the record, I HAPPEN TO BE A GODDAMN USER TOO YOU KNOW, I TOO COULD JUST MOVE BACK TO WINDOWS.

[Vadi]

Just because you're OK with starting at a terminal after an upgrade or install, it doesn't mean everybody is.

A 800x600 res with a mouse is a lot better than a terminal with no proper introduction.