Re: Xorg replaces TTY1
On Tue 24 Nov 2015 at 17:36:49 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2015-11-23 00:45:57 +0000, Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 22 Nov 2015 at 19:00:36 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> >
> > > On 2015-11-22 at 18:52, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 05:56:04PM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>> startx -- vt7
> > > >>
> > > >> That requires specifying it by hand every time startx is run. As I
> > > >> indicated, that is unacceptable; I don't have to specify the VT
> > > >> manually every time I lanch X now in order to get the current
> > > >> behavior, and I shouldn't have to specify it manually at every
> > > >> launch in order get that behavior after a change of the default.
> > > >>
> > > >> Where/how would it be possible to specify this in a config file, so
> > > >> that it can be set-and-forget if desired?
> > > >
> > > > In .bashrc (if using bash)
> > > >
> > > > alias startx="startx -- vt7"
> > >
> > > While that would technically work, it's a bit of a kludge, and I'm not
> > > fond of those. Perhaps I should have specified an _X-related_ config
> > > file (by a definition in which xinit, including startx, qualifies as
> > > being X-related).
> >
> > Passing arguments to startx is X-related. It's the first time I've heard
> > using a bash alias described as a "kludge".
>
> Users tend to forget that they have aliases. One day, they want to
> add other arguments, and things start to break because the order
> of arguments matters, and they wonder why.
That's tangential. I have a TV setup with a Debian thin client and have
been known to forget why it is connected as it is and what it does. :)
> > Quoting:
> >
> > There are 2 reasons for this change:
> >
> > 1) It is needed to make Xorg run without root rights
>
> Do you mean that the user now needs to be root to do "startx -- vt7"?
*I* don't mean anything. I was quoting what a developer said. But "no",
the user does not have to be root.
> > 2) The old behavior creates a new session-id (as returned by getsid()),
> > without registering it with PAM, this breaks session managers such
> > as systemd-logind.
>
> Couldn't registering it with PAM have been a better solution?
Above my pay grade, I'm glad to say.
Reply to: