Which file to initialize X? (was Re: Sawfish and Openbox: was fastest linux distro)

[Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com>]

Brian wrote:
> On Wed 04 Jun 2014 at 23:56:37 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> 
> > Brian wrote:
> > 
> > > Those who use startx etc have some expectation of being provided with
> > > uncomplicated correct information.
> > 
> > The 'startx' is basically the "simple" way to start X and to use the
> > system supplied defaults.  Which is a good way to get things going for
> > the new person who doesn't know what they want or who are happy with
> > the defaults.  It isn't required though and after making a few
> > customizations I find it easier to just use 'xinit' directly and my
> > own full .xinitrc file with only my own choices made there.  (shrug)
> > 
> > > Being told to use ~/.Xdefaults isn't in that category. The sooner
> > > any mention of it or .xinitrc in Debian is stamped out the better.
> > 
> > I think use of .Xdefaults isn't as good as .Xresources.  But there
> > isn't anything wrong with .xinitrc.  What is your complaint about it?
> 
> In spite of my hyperbole it isn't .xinitrc in itself which is the cause
> of my discontent but its being presented as being equivalent to
> .xsession. It may or may not matter that the /etc/X11/Xsession.d files
> in are not used, but not appreciating that this could lead to a
> misconfigured or partially working system is one consequence of
> following advice which often does not apply to a Debian system. The
> Debian Reference gets it right and manages to do so without any mention
> of .xinitrc.

I would be interested in having a summary. 

For my purposes, I use startx, and 'man startx' tells me to
put my initializations in .xinitrc, and does not refer
to any other init files.

I used to have an .xsession file, which eventually stopped
working.

'man xsession' gives some other, more complicated advice.
I guess it's time to start reading about this. :^)

Regards,

Joel


-- 
Joel Roth