* Matthew A. Nicholson (firstname.lastname@example.org) disait :
Hmm rhgb is a nice peice of software, it seems they have a list of things
that happen built into the software that are announced as they happen. A
quick glance over the source reveals a client/server arch in which the rhgb
server is started and then starts X, upon which time gtk is used to do
pretty stuff. Pretty intresting.
Yes, but if you look at the README file in the cvs source tree of rhgb,
you'll find an interesting notice
There is no local security, really. It's quite possible for anyone
during the boot process to talk to either the X server, or send random
requests to the rhgb binary.
Totally insecure protocol. Clean up the code a bit.
Even if I agree on the point that rhgb has some important drawbacks, I like the main idea behind.
To conclude about rhgb, it seems that it has a nice set of pretty interesting
ideas implemented inside, but with some serious drawbacks :
- a lack of scalability/tuning with configuration files.
- a big security hole.
But it has a nice concept :
- setting up a Vesa X server and use a minimal client to print some stuff on it.
Do you think it would be a good idea to start some work with rhgb and SystemService ?
I myself am very intrested in something like this:
Is there some code to look at ? That looks to be only a blog entry...
For a init rewrite for desktop use to be done properly it must support
* Alerting the user that new hardware was added to the system *after* boot
* Announcing it's actions and progress as it goes.
* Handling boot failures gracefully.
* Looking good, or not.
* Single userish mode for failure recovery.
Pretty agree with you :)
To me, one important point for the Debian community would be to allow a simple way
to disable the graphic bootup system.
RHGB is nice, but it does not fill all of those needs, not that it would be
a bad thing to have in debian or anything...
Yep, and to you, would it be hard to hack rhgb to fit our needs ? ;-)
(I'm pretty excited in contributing on this).