Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-28 Thread Bjørn Mork
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: This feature was in squeeze and so far we didn’t reinstate it in 3.x on upstream request. This is because they complained people used this feature to shoot themselves in the foot and then accused gdm of being broken. So they choose to break gdm and

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mercredi 22 février 2012 à 23:52 +, Ian Jackson a écrit : I wanted to add a command-line option to my X server. I spent 15 mins trawling through docs and grepping for config options with no luck. So I asked a search engine. Actually there is a way in squeeze (since you’re talking

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread The Fungi
On 2012-02-22 23:52:09 + (+), Ian Jackson wrote: On my netbook I'm running a pretty vanilla install of squeeze, although my personal desktop session is very different to usual. I wanted to add a command-line option to my X server. I spent 15 mins trawling through docs and grepping

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread Russ Allbery
The Fungi fu...@yuggoth.org writes: Maybe I don't use enough of the whiz-bang graphicky features lots of people want, but I find logging into a vty and launching startx, just like I have for decades, to work just fine. I'm certainly not going to begrudge others their pointy-clicky fanciness,

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le jeudi 23 février 2012 à 05:54 -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit : I probably missed some key thing that makes this work, but the last time I tried, using startx when you want to launch a desktop environment like GNOME or Xfce was quite painful and confusing. There might be some remaining

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread The Fungi
On 2012-02-23 05:54:49 -0800 (-0800), Russ Allbery wrote: I probably missed some key thing that makes this work, but the last time I tried, using startx when you want to launch a desktop environment like GNOME or Xfce was quite painful and confusing. [...] Ahh, yes... I don't try. I'm just

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 08:56:22AM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: Moreover, other display manager may not work correctly because gdm3 is the only display manager supporting all modern stuff. For example, we could switch to something like slim but slim does not play nice with ConsoleKit

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-23 Thread Fernando Lemos
Em 23/02/2012 14:58, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org escreveu: On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 08:56:22AM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: Moreover, other display  manager may not work correctly  because gdm3 is the only  display manager supporting  all modern stuff. For  example, we could switch to  

Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-22 Thread Ian Jackson
On my netbook I'm running a pretty vanilla install of squeeze, although my personal desktop session is very different to usual. I wanted to add a command-line option to my X server. I spent 15 mins trawling through docs and grepping for config options with no luck. So I asked a search engine.

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-22 Thread Miles Bader
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes: We should not still be using this software. Er, given that gdm3 works fine for many people, that seems excessive. Moreover, the choice of default display manager seems unrelated to its ability to support obscure tweaks -- indeed, it's very

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3

2012-02-22 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du jeudi 23 février 2012, vers 06:47, Miles Bader mi...@gnu.org disait : We should not still be using this software. Er, given that gdm3 works fine for many people, that seems excessive. Moreover, the choice of default display manager seems unrelated to its