| 1 |
On 13/07/2021 15:07, Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2021-07-12, Grant Taylor <gtaylor@×××××××××××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 7/12/21 2:21 PM, antlists wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Two problems - I would like to run without X, but it seems that the |
| 5 |
>>> greeters need X to run ... |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Yes, they do. Why do you need a "greeter"? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Well, most modern linux systems boot to a gui login screen, which, aiui, |
| 10 |
is called a greeter ... |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>> I'm not familiar with the term "greeter", but I assume that you're |
| 13 |
>> referring to the display manager that functions as the GUI login screen. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
Yup. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Configuration may be ornery, but I would assume ~> expect that this is |
| 18 |
>> possible to do. After all, you're really talking about having the |
| 19 |
>> system function as two independent X11 servers, |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> The OP explicitly stated he wants to run without X. AFAICT he wants |
| 22 |
> two separte Linux consoles. I don't think that's possible. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
Thing is, X is obsolete, so if I can have my system work without X |
| 25 |
installed, that would be nice. If I have to install it, tough that's the |
| 26 |
way it is. It just seems weird that you should still need X installed to |
| 27 |
login if you want your system to be pure Wayland. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
But to describe my desire as "having two X servers running" is good |
| 30 |
enough. I'd just rather it was two Wayland instances running. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
My previous setup was two PCs networked. But it took up too much space, |
| 33 |
and because so much data was shared between me and my wife the second PC |
| 34 |
effectively didn't use its hard disk for anything beyond the OS (plus it |
| 35 |
was an old chip, an old PC basically). Hence my desire for the curent |
| 36 |
setup to be a powerful, SINGLE PC, but from the user's POV it looks like |
| 37 |
there are two PCs. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Cheers, |
| 40 |
Wol |
Archives