Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:18:48 +0100 From: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> To: Dejan Lesjak <dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: xdm rc scripts Message-ID: <200502192218.49245.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> In-Reply-To: <200502192103.29893.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> References: <200502182225.45734.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> <200502192024.51984.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> <200502192103.29893.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
El S=E1bado, 19 de Febrero de 2005 21:03, Dejan Lesjak escribi=F3: > On Saturday 19 of February 2005 20:24, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > El S=E1bado, 19 de Febrero de 2005 19:55, Dejan Lesjak escribi=F3: > > > On Friday 18 of February 2005 22:25, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I launch PRs ports/74000 and ports/74003 time ago, to make > > > > launch of xdm from a rcNG script possible (Not mandatory). > > > > > > > > I think that this must be part of X11 clients ports, but if > > > > someone find any issue with this, let me know. > > > > > > Hi, > > > Some of my issues: > > > In my opinion there is no need for a rc script to start xdm, > > > since this is already taken care of by /etc/ttys which also > > > starts gettys on other ttys - so all of gettys and xdm, which > > > "[...] provides services similar to those provided by [...] > > > getty [...]" are in one place. This putting of configuration of > > > things which are similar seems to be exactly what you intended, > > > or am I completely mistaken? > > > > Not really. > > First, the offered scripts are the only method I know to unifor > > launch xdm/gdm/kdm. gdm can't be launch from /etc/ttys. > > Yes, but as I already explained, having a script that would take care > of (at least) 4 ports in one port doesn't seem the right way to go, > so I was explicitly talking only about xdm here. The only way that > such script would make sense (in my opinion) would be if it was > installed in base (which I don't think would be good for other > reasons) or by separate port (which would seem overkill for > installing an optional script as opposed to rc_subr which installs > script that is required by several ports). > However it would perhaps be nice if you could submit this alternative > way of starting display managers to doc@ and they might consider > adding it to Handbook as an example. > > > > Furthermore the PRs you submitted would require us to patch > > > XFree86 and X.Org code which is not necessary, because that code > > > is perfectly fine and has worked, works and probably will work > > > for some time to come. We have in X11 ports quite a few of > > > patches which are needed to > > > > The patches to Xorg/X11 code are not needed for the scripts. Only > > install the rc script. The patches try to solve a real race > > problem between init (the gettys) and gdm (which must be launch > > from localpackage). > > > > This is documented in main XFree86/Xorg docs. If gdm/xdm/kdm > > doesn't have 'hard assigned' an vt, it may stole vt (in the FreeBSD > > case, vt0/vt1) if it get running before init launch gettys. > > > > If this happens (I often get this in fast machines), you may end in > > front of a gdm login script, with mouse, but without any keyboard > > input. > > Changing things so that xdm starts from rc script seems like a > regression then. See as far as I understand things work just fine now > and I want to know if changing then really brings enough benefits > that would merit patching vendor sources and adding two files in > ports tree. I'm also concerned about possible confusion that would > result in having these rc files installed - users changing both > /etc/ttys and rc.conf and weird problems that could result in that. > > > > split installation of X11 distribution into separate pieces to > > > hopefully ease maintenance for users in case where only one > > > component needs updating. These are the patches that will never > > > be submitted to upstreams, since they are completely ports > > > specific and both of X11 build fine without them. Your patch to > > > programs/xdm/config/Imakefile would increase the burden of > > > maintaining local patches for what, at least to me so far, > > > doesn't seem like something that actually needs patching - xdm on > > > FreeBSD will take the first virtual terminal available so > > > hardcoding default doesn't seem to be the right way. Which brings > > > me to another point... In your PR, you mention "race problems". > > > Could you please explain > > > > Allready done. > > Thanks. > > > > what do you mean by this. If there is a problem that would be > > > introduced with starting xdm through rc script, then that is > > > another reason not to abandon the long time documented way of > > > doing things, which works quite well. Note that this only goes > > > for xdm. If there is > > > > I still have some FreeBSD-2.x machines running, but I prefer > > install FreeBSD-5. I think there're really good reasons to > > _permit_, not _force_ the use of a rcNG script. > > And it is permitted, nothing prevents user to create a rc script and > run xdm from that. There are many things that can be done in a way > that is neither recommended nor documented, but I believe that the > way that presently is documented works well and don't see a reason to > complicate it. > > > > any script eventually included in either X11 -clients, then that > > > script cannot take responsibility of starting things which come > > > from other ports such as gdm or kdm (BTW, you forgot wdm). Kdm > > > and gdm > > > > Point me to the port and I'll take a look on this. > > It's conveniently named wdm and resides in x11/wdm. > > > > have their own maintainer teams who know how to start their > > > programs properly and intruding into their territory with this > > > script seems neither appropriate nor wise (consider that the way > > > in which wdm starts changes in one version - how intuitive would > > > it be to expect people to upgrade xorg-clients to get wdm > > > working, not to mention why would people who don't use wdm or any > > > foodm for that matter need to upgrade their ports). In short: > > > stuffing startup of all display managers into one script would > > > seem a bad idea. > > > > rcNG have enough resorces to cope with this without need of futher > > scripts cahnges. > > I apologise, I don't understand what you mean by this or how it > relates to the concern I've written. > The script take gdm/kdm/Xserver as 'very common special cases', but you=20 may use this to launch any xdm-like program. even from=20 only /etc/rc.conf This may be more customize using /etc/rc.conf.d/xdm. I allready use this=20 for NetStation style kiosk constructs. > > > So I haven't been convinced so far that making rc script for > > > purpose of starting a kind of getty would be either needed or > > > something that would simplify things. I don't believe that > > > rc.conf is the only file users edit after their FreeBSD > > > installation. I also don't believe that it would be good if > > > things were changed so that rc.conf would be the only file users > > > would need to edit. There was mentioned a question of policy vs. > > > features among the thread discussing this... I don't believe a > > > policy is dictated by having an example of starting xdm in > > > /etc/ttys file - users can still make their own rc script if they > > > want and configure it as it fits their purpose, be it "old style" > > > rc script or rcNG one. > > > > > > > > > Dejan > > > > well, I'll close the PRs. > > > > thanks for your time, > > Oh, no problem about time and I'm also not necessarily right. I just > wanted to voice my concerns with introducing this scripts and if I've > managed to sound to negative I do apologise. But I will stress once > again that such a change would in my opinion (and again this is my > opinion if there are many people that think otherwise, I'm sure they > will followup) need serious benefits to be done. > The script for starting xfs that you also suggested was on the other > hand a great idea and it also doesn't affect things in the way xdm > one would so thank you for your time and suggestions. > > > Dejan To be honest, I've enough things in my TODO list to cope with this. I only have to get this working for one of my customers, and I can =20 fullfill this with local patches. =2D- josemi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200502192218.49245.josemi>