Colin Walters wrote:

We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
in the long run.


Um... what happens then when X is broken?

--
Matthew
What? This signature /again/?

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
>> It seems a useful initial step toward resolution is to run pulseaudio
>> as a system daemon, via an init script, /sbin/service, /sbin/chkconfig.
>> The trade-offs vs the per user model that F-9 employs are probably more
>> than acceptable to most a11y users.
>>
>> So, let me simply ask ... Has anyone a working init script for
>> pulseaudio as a system daemon? Anything close that we could continue to
>> refine as an alternative configuration option for Fedora?
>
> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
> in the long run.

On a related note, here we get to my pet bug, too: 444172. I often
use my desktop with one X session to the machine itself, and another X
session remotely logged in to my work laptop via XDMCP. However, the
per-user model means that not only can I not use PA on the laptop to
play over the desktop's speakers, but I can't continue to play
anything through the first X session.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444172

(It's filed under ConsoleKit, as that seemed to be where the problem
was. I'm more than happy to reassign it if that makes sense )

-Chris
--
Chris Weyl
Ex astris, scientia

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Colin Walters wrote:



Those have been useful to me in a lot of circumstances that I don't
see going away anytime soon. Here are a few just off the top of my
head.


"Login is slow" - something we know about and makes sense to fix,
rather than having an entirely different way to log in.


How about 'starting X doesn't work'? Or can you guarantee that won't
ever happen again? And what about servers that don't need any X
programs? Or where essentially all access is through ssh, remote X
sessions, and freenx/NX?


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
<mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Colin Walters wrote:
>>
>> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
>> in the long run.
>
> Um... what happens then when X is broken?

What happens when the linux kernel is broken? What happens when
/bin/sh is broken? What happens when NetworkManager is broken? You
fix the bug.

Also, one thing I would like to see Fedora install by default is a
compressed recovery image, rather than just multiple kernels.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> Colin Walters wrote:
>>>
>>> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
>>> in the long run.
>>
>> Um... what happens then when X is broken?
>
> What happens when the linux kernel is broken? What happens when
> /bin/sh is broken? What happens when NetworkManager is broken? You
> fix the bug.


I think you misunderstand? X being broken isn't always a bug. It can
simply be a configuration issue. How is one suppose to fix a config
issue with X in this scenario?

--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> Colin Walters wrote:
>>>
>>> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
>>> in the long run.
>>
>> Um... what happens then when X is broken?
>
> What happens when the linux kernel is broken? What happens when
> /bin/sh is broken? What happens when NetworkManager is broken? You
> fix the bug.


I think you misunderstand? X being broken isn't always a bug. It can
simply be a configuration issue. How is one suppose to fix a config
issue with X in this scenario?

--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Colin Walters wrote:

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
<mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

Colin Walters wrote:

We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
in the long run.

Um... what happens then when X is broken?


What happens when the linux kernel is broken? What happens when
/bin/sh is broken? What happens when NetworkManager is broken? You
fix the bug.



Errr, when the kernel or shell are broken you don't run at all until you
fix them. When X isn't running, you run faster and more efficiently.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Colin Walters wrote:

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
<mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

Colin Walters wrote:

We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
in the long run.

Um... what happens then when X is broken?


What happens when the linux kernel is broken?


...then you boot from a disk with a bootable kernel.


What happens when /bin/sh is broken?


Hmm... then you probably need a rescue disk to replace /bin/sh.


What happens when NetworkManager is broken?


You fix it :-). You've degenerated from errors that result in an
unusable system (meaning: cannot boot to a command prompt from which, at
the least, basic repair tools are available) to errors that are
potentially mere annoyances.


Let's go back to my question:


What happens when X is broken?


Then you boot in non-X mode.

Oh, wait. You want to remove non-X mode. You want me to have to go find
a rescue disk, just because 'yum update nvidia' wasn't such a good idea?
No, thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal
console from which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less
needing to dig up a rescue disk :P.


Currently non-functioning X is like non-functioning network; annoying,
but not crippling (kernel still works, shell still works, still possible
to run commands, do debugging, etc., without rebooting or a rescue
disk). You're proposing to make it a system-crippling problem. I will
suggest that making a known-fragile component *required* for a
functional system, including any chance of repair (short of a rescue
disk), is the worst idea I've heard in a while. (But I /have/ heard it
before. It's called "Windows". YTH do we want to copy /that/?)


...not to mention that X is bloated and completely unneeded overhead on
servers. Even Microsoft realizes this; I hear 2008 has a non-GUI mode
for exactly this reason.



Also, one thing I would like to see Fedora install by default is a
compressed recovery image, rather than just multiple kernels.


That would help, but would still require rebooting all the time until X
is working (anyone say "PITA"?). Currently, "bad kernel" is the only
situation that needs a reboot to test if it works. (Well, non-working
/bin/sh depends on why it is non-working; if it's a bad binary, you can
try to run it as a subshell, so no reboot needed. If it's an interaction
with other bits of the system, it might fall into the 'needs reboot to
test' category. But non-working X currently is comfortably NOT in the
'needs reboot' category.)


--
Matthew
What? This signature /again/?

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
<mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> No,
> thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal console from
> which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing to dig up
> a rescue disk :P.

I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
that functionality if possible. Anyways, I've said what I need to, so
hopefully people won't be surprised later.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
>> No,
>> thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal console from
>> which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing to dig up
>> a rescue disk :P.
>
> I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
> that functionality if possible. Anyways, I've said what I need to, so
> hopefully people won't be surprised later.


I'm confused. Is Fedora really going to remove non X consoles?


--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list