Re: Xorg replaces TTY1
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 08:22:20 +0000, Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2015, John L. Ries wrote:
> > Actually, if someone is starting X via startx instead of a display manager,
> > it normally means either that the user is trying to test his X
> > configuration, or that X is only intended to run intermittently, with TTY
> > mode being the norm. So having X replace the terminal in that circumstance
> > does not at all strike me as a happy thing,
>
> I don't agree with this. I don't use a desktop manager but even if I
> did, I'd prefer to start X via startx.
The whole point of an X display manager is that you don't need to start X
manually- you just select your session and log in. How do you envision using a
display manager and still starting X manually?
Until recently, I did not use a display manager. I used startx and Xfce. I
recently switched to MATE, and was basically told by the Debian wiki that I had
to use a display manager (so I installed LightDM too). (this is addressed to
the list now) Is this actually true? Is it possible for MATE to be configured
to work properly with permissions, PolicyKit, etc. without a DM, like Xfce is?
My MATE has all sorts of dodgy issues even with a DM when it comes to
permissions and various settings menus.
> This gives me more control. If
> something goes wrong with X you are screwed if you don't have an easily
> accessible TTY to diagnose the problem. I'm sure I'm not alone in
> this.
You're not alone in this. But technically an easily accessible TTY is still
available even with the new setup- it's just in a different VT than it used to
be. I don't really see the problem with this, since the other Alt+F<key>s
still work, and the other VTs are still accessible (although I can understand
the 'muscle memory' complaints of some').
Reply to: