On 10/18/20 2:29 AM, Joonas Niilola wrote: > > > On 10/18/20 8:48 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 18:05 -0400, Aisha Tammy wrote: >>> This package provides the 'display-manager' startup script for >>> handling your chosen display manager, without being dependent on >>> Xorg server. > being dependent -> depending > >> >> Do you really think a rename for the sake of renaming justifies >> requiring all users to rewrite their configuration? While we're >> requiring the users to do that, wouldn't it be better to stop using >> the awful layout of 'one script to run them all', and switch to separate >> scripts for every DM? >> > This is exactly what I proposed in the previous RFC, systemd already works > this way and is IMHO a lot clearer to use. > > -- juippis >
This would need some more tinkering as OpenRC doesn't have a dedicated mechanism to control vt's while systemd controls the vts. IMO systemd is also very centralized, except that it hides it in its internals, as every services that wants to use a tty has to register with it. Nothing wrong with that, its a perfectly good method. I'm curious about why people are averse to a centralized script, it seems to be the simpler and cleaner option, atleast to me, presumably as different scripts for each DM *can* have different working mechanisms, and any fix applied to one of the DMs might have to be applied to others. Also the fact that the packages don't supply an OpenRC script on their own so every package would need an additional file from our end. Additionally we would need to able to say that each of them is going to conflict with the other. Aisha
