gdm 2.24.0

[Patryk Zawadzki]

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Jan Rekorajski
<baggins at sith.mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
>> Xorg devs prefer if we let Xorg pick the vte. It worked for you
>> because back then Xorg did not do this and gdm forced vte9.
> Learn to understand what you're reading. X always could pick it's own vte.

Xorg had serious problems with vts at the time gdm 2.4 introduced that
option (it would go and screw up even if launched after all ttys were
up).

>> >> Don't ask me, we use a pretty non-standard and not-recommended method
>> >> to start gdm.
>> > What was the problem with forcing a tty number in default config?
>> See above.
> I see your lack of reading skills.

See again.

>> > It worked for years. And BTW having multiple Xorg instances on one
>> > machine is a very non-standard thing, so why should we care?
>> It's pretty standard for any computer with user switching if you ask me.
> So, how come nobody ever complained?

There was a huge hack to enumerate the devices and walk over each one
starting from a given number, then try to find an unused one. I don't
feel like porting that code over at the moment.

Still, the recommended way to start gdm is using upstart or inittab as
xorg needs to be started after all ttys are up. We can work around
that for years but we're the only distro to run gdm this way.

>> >> It's a new app written from scratch. A more correct statement would be
>> >> "everything is no more."
>> > As usual with Gnome, total fuck up first, maybe clean up later. A lot later.
>> Please elaborate on that on GNOME lists or /dev/null.
> ROTFL. What for? I saw a "discussion" on removal of splash screen. Gnome devs
> answer was "because", even after they heard from two major distros that
> was stupid. Elaborating anything on GNOME lists is pointless because they
> live in their own small world and can't hear anything else.

Yes, it's a huge conspiracy against you :D

Go get some coffee and cool down.

>> > BTW When will you (you as Gnome develpoers) fix session handling (like
>> > save/restore)?
>> When you file a proper bug report.
> See above, there's no point.

If you use GNOME, file a bug and then you can complain. If you don't
use GNOME, why do you care? Again, there is no conspiracy and sessions
work for a lot of people including me. If you don't file a bug, it
won't get fixed as we need someone who can describe and reproduce the
bugs.

>> >> Will do.
>> > We'll see, and smite you if you screw this up again.
>>
>> Sure, sure. Either propose a working solution or kiss my tail -1
> Sure, restore vte9 in default config. Plain and simple.

It could work but see above. I might port that code over if arekm
votes against upstart and gdm maintainers declare they will accept the
patch.

-- 
Patryk Zawadzki