On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:41:56PM +0200, Jes?s Guerrero wrote: > I don't know where this came from, but this .xinitrc is utterly > useless.
It's not that useless. > As someone said, you are putting icewm, not fvwm in here. I can't figure > how do you expect fvwm to start ok. > > But there are bigger flaws in that script. To start with, you should be > using '&' at the end of each command. Otherwise, the server will just > wait until that process has ended to start the following. Well, in the example .xinitrc script supplied, the source command is a builtin, so no backgrounding needed at all, and the last command was the WM (not FVWM, but...) which doesn't necessarily need an exec at all, it's just polite. (And it would be an exec, rather than backgrounding it -- you want to kick the patent shell out of the way entirely). > But there is an even bigger flaw: you are using exec at the very > beginning of the script. When you call something with 'exec', you > tell the parent shell to close itself, and completely transfer the > control to the new process you are launching (as far as I know). So, > anything below the exec line, is, virtually, nonexistent. You do if you have a *calling* program. In this example, it's perfectly valid, you're just explicitly redirecting both STDERR and STDOUT (in this instance) to the named file for each process which generates any -- in this case, that process would be icewm. > Also, and this is one thing I really can't figure out: why the heck > are you sourcing your bashrc file from xinitrc??? So that the environemnt is inherited when the WM is launched. -- Thomas Adam -- "He wants you back, he screams into the night air, like a fireman going through a window that has no fire." -- Mike Myers, "This Poem Sucks".
