| 1 |
Michał Górny posted on Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:30:22 +0200 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> 2) separate init.d scripts |
| 4 |
> -------------------------- |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> This one is even heavier but more clean. This way, we only keep |
| 7 |
> a minimal subset of DM-related code in common, and let every DM install |
| 8 |
> its own init.d script. This way, we keep them clean and flexible. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> On the other hand, that would introduce a lot of repeating code, |
| 11 |
> and user would need to explicitly add appropriate DM to the runlevel. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Consider this a user vote for this one. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Perhaps put the common code in some sort of dependency (the initscripts |
| 16 |
could source a common base), and let each ?DM install its own init-script |
| 17 |
front-end. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
That would allow users (like me) who don't use a ?DM (text login, custom |
| 20 |
scripts that do some setup and run startx) to kill the initscripts and |
| 21 |
associated infrastructure (in the common dependency), currently shipping |
| 22 |
with xorg-server, for them. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 26 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 27 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives