[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SEUL: SEUL duplicating efforts?
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> This should be in the UI list.
> On 14-Feb-98 Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> - ->
> - ->
> - -> On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Erik Walthinsen wrote:
> - ->
> - ->> > Some heavy-duty improvements to the startx script wouldn't go
> - ->> > astray. What would be really nice is a program that generates an
> - ->> > 'xstartup' script or something of the sort. Just some program that
> - ->> > invites
> - ->> > you to do some options (Xauthority, default color depth , config file
> - ->> > etc)
> - ->> > and spits out a script.
> - ->>
> - ->> We should be making use of XDM for SEUL. The use of startx doesn't allow
> - ->> the machine to be used by multiple people without going into text mode.
> - ->> In
> - ->> order to log into the machine, they have to log into a text-based virtual
> - ->> console and type startx, or have it done for them. XDM or similar allows
> - ->> us to stay completely graphical, which is the goal.
> Already working on the graphics and functions like xconsole, fonts, and
> session manager.
> - -> Standardizing on XDM is a nice idea, in that XDM takes care of some of the
> - -> main newbie annoyances, such as greatly simplifying the process of
> - -> starting multiple X-sessions, and taking care of X-authentication.
> - ->
> - -> You can do this with xinit but not with
> - -> startx, so it's basically due to a shortcoming with the startx script.
> - -> Like I said, the existing startx script is not very good, since it doesn't
> - -> do what it's supposed to (fire up X and take care of everything in a
> - -> sensible way)
> - ->
> - -> My questions about XDM at the moment are:
> - ->
> - -> (a) It's hard to set things such as colour depth when you're running
> - -> XDM (still haven't worked this one out ...), some kind of "intuitive"
> - -> configuration tools for XDM would be nice. (?)
> 2 scripts can handle 2 aspects of your statement. Initial use should bring
> the user into an 8 bpp failsafe mode with a script to setup his color depth.
> The script uses alternat Xserver files with progressive depth settings and
> times out if the user doesn't validate the depth is working. The higher
> depth files are removed from the system and the default in the Xserver file
> is set to the highest his card handles.
> A menu item for depth change fires a script that replaces the default Xserver
> with the alternate file with the desired color depth and the user is prompted
> to restart X to change the depth.
> - -> (b) What would happen in case of emergency ( ie X-Windows not working
> - -> properly ) ? Possibly makes diagnostic work a little harder. I guess you
> - -> could boot into run level 2 or 3 ... (?)
> We can only do our best to cover all bets and make changes as new situations
> occur. I wonder if xdm can be placed in the inittab so as to catch the
> repawning when the Xserver flashes due to an error. Then init could stop
> this for us. The user could switch to a VT and scream for help.
> This is just thinking aloud since I doubt init would catch the Xserver
> re-spawning itself.
This is exactly why I suggest letting the user boot to a command prompt
enter a command to start X from there. This is why Windows 3.11 seams
to people with problematic PCs than Windows 95. Getting to the command
to fix stuff is not a major undertaking.
As for having multiple users logging in without going to a command
is not a major feature in the SEUL target markets. At an Office each PC
be well served with 3 Accounts ( root, for the Admin. to fix stuff.
goy it's assigned to, and Gust, in case someone needs to get something
while user is away and without disturbing the admin. ... lot's of limits
course. ). More importantly none of these PCs would run a Terminal off
serial port, none would be a major league server, none would be doing
save run stuff like StarOffice ( very nice :)
: "Through the firewall, out the router, down the T1, across the
: backbone, bounced from satellite, Nothing but net."