[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Default display manager should not be gdm3



OoO En cette  fin de nuit blanche du jeudi 23  février 2012, vers 06:47,
Miles Bader <miles@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
> ability to support obscure tweaks -- indeed, it's very common for
> default packages to be those that are nicer for "average" users, not
> those that are the most customizable.  You have the choice of easily
> installing other display managers that meet your criteria, so what's
> the big deal?

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 which means that a  user logged with slim won't be considered
as a  local user and therefore  won't have rights  for power management,
network configuration and things like that. See:
 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=601003

The main  problem is things are now  more complex than 10  years ago and
alternatives are  unable to  cope with all  the new things  necessary to
make a  desktop work correctly.  We have  to rely on parts  of the GNOME
desktop. Unfortunately, those parts are dependant on other parts and are
not as hackable and documented as we are used to.
-- 
Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im

Make input easy to proofread.
            - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

Attachment: pgpBF9KykPDPj.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: