--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, Feb 17, 1999 at 09:49:01PM +0100, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
> You hardly have a chance. One of the X packages suggests xdm. And you
> know how persistant dselect is about suggests :-(
xfree86-common suggests xdm; xbase depends on it. xbase should not be
installed at all, it's there for backwards compatibility. dselect will be a
little persistant about the suggestion, but not as persistant as if it was a
recommendation.
> What I fear is, that (new)users install X (and xdm, like dselect
> suggests). Then don't finish X configuration, or misconfigure X. Then they
> give up for the day. Next time they start Debian, they get the blinking
> screen syndrom, when xdm tries to start the X server ad infinitum.
Well, a lot of effort has been put into the X packages to prevent that from
happening. First, there's parse-xf86config, which tries to catch a lot of
showstoppers in /etc/X11/XF86Config. If you still manage to make a non
valid XF86Config (invalid sync ranges, like 2-3, could do this), then xdm
will start and stop up to four times (not sure about the number, could be
six) (I know it works, I'm confident about it, I've tested it on several
situations). After that, xdm won't stop (it has to serve remote sessions)
but it will disable the faulty local server.
> Then we will have a hard time telling them how to disable xdm in
> singleuser mode.
linux single, chmod 0000 /etc/init.d/xdm should do it.
> Policy says, that a package should be functional after installation. I
> don't know if this is wise for xdm. Maybe it should come disabled and
> print a message how to enable in in postinst.
Hmm... that's a good point.
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
--- End Message ---