FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-29-2008, 07:40 AM
"Aioanei Rares"
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Dax Kelson <dkelson@gurulabs.com> wrote:

I would argue strongly that this change should not be made for the
following reasons (in no particular order):


* The default behavior of X on tty7 has been in place since the
beginning (almost a decade and a half).

* Long standing behaviors and defaults should not be changed unless
there is a VERY good reason with a significant upside. Developers should

tread respectfully in such hallowed places.

* This specific Linux behavior is well documented in hundreds of
thousand of publications ranging from college text books, HOWTOs, Linux
books sold in retail stores, blogs, forums, guides, and training

manuals. Making a change invalidates all that published knowledge.

* Fedora (and presumably RHEL6) now behaves differently from all the
major distributions. The axiom about those who ignore history are bound

to repeat holds here. UNIX "distros" did the same thing, introducing
frivolous incompatibilities. This fractures the user community, creating
separate pockets of knowledge and experience for each system.


* The "exception to the rule" (such as this one) dramatically increases
the costs of cross-distribution support. It turns 300-page books into
1000-page books. Similarly one must remember and commit to memory all

the "exceptions" and swap them in and out of your mental working set as
needed.

* Fedora is now inconsistent with itself in regards to where X is
running depending on if you booted to runlevel 3 and used startx or if

you booted to runlevel 5. When your uptime is 3 weeks, how do you
remember which method you used to start the GUI?

* Having tty1 be the user's "primary console" (as mentioned in BZ
465547) is not a worthy goal as desktop (GUI only) users should not and

do not care what tty X is on.

* Experienced users will try CONTROL-ALT-F1 and nothing will happen, the
first thing that comes to mind is "something is broke".

* With the current rawhide behavior, what happens when you combine this

with fast user switching? The first user's desktop is on tty1, and then
is the second desktop is on tty7, and the third on tty8? I tried to test
this in my lab but I suspect video driver problems (radeon) because my

test machine would lock up.

* Having the X server start on tty7 *from the very beginning* would get
one less "flicker" without making an incompatible change.

I support progress, but I hate to see two steps forward and one back. I

understand change is natural but the change should be well reasoned with
implications considered and weighed.

To put my comments in "context" and to show that I'm not just a nutter
with an uniformed opinion, and in a way of introduction, here's a bit

about myself. I've used (typically in production) every single version
of Red Hat and/or Fedora ever created (go Mother's Day!). I started an
ISP and grew it to 10,000 users using (initially) Red Hat 4.2 (not

RHEL), and I was the first person/customer of Red Hat to earn an RHCE
(Feb 1999). I have minor patches in many different projects and several
hundred bugs in bugzilla.redhat.com. I was the official GNOME RPM

maintainer for a few years around the turn of the century creating GNOME
RPMs for several distributions for each new GNOME release.

For the past 9 years I have made a living writing Linux courseware for
multiple Linux distributions and teaching Linux training classes along

with the rest of the dozen full time instructors at Guru Labs, a company
I founded with a college friend of mine. I've sold tens of thousands of
Linux training books. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to

participate on the lists as much as I would like too. However, because
of my daily work I get to observe the low level changes and development
process of many different Linux distributions giving me a broad
perspective.


Our coureware features extensive labs which have thousands of lab steps
that exercise virtually all the major software components and features
thereof. As we update/validate our courseware to work on the latest

Linux distribution versions, our courseware ends up acting like a giant
regression test. We end up patching and/or filing many many bug reports
in many bug trackers.

Uneeded and frivolous incompatibilities between Linux distros are

particularly annoying to me on many levels. One practical reason is the
bloat it causes in our courseware. The LSB is fine for developers who
want to run binaries across multiple distributions, but Linux Sys Admins

deserve something akin to the LSB that provides greater consistency at
the Sys Admin level by removing squashing these frivolous
incompatibilities. This is something that has been brewing in the back
of my mind and I (using Guru Labs funding/resources and other interested

parties) might tackle at some point.

Dax Kelson
Guru Labs

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


+1
--
Aioanei Rares
schaiba@fedoraproject.org

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:16 AM
Richard Hughes
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 23:36 -0600, Dax Kelson wrote:
> I would argue strongly that this change should not be made for the
> following reasons (in no particular order):

Does it matter? Seriously, we need to start X on ttyX and start ONE
mingetty on ttyX+1. Loading mingetty on 6 terminals takes time.

Who uses more than one mingetty anyway? Surely the sort of person
comfortable with the RSI-inducing ctrl-alt-Fx is the sort of person that
can edit a config file and increase the number if we provide one by
default.

I was thinking about trying to tackle the boot time of fedora (and get
to the 5 second nirvana), but I fear that bikeshedding like this will
mean we are still loading sendmail, isdn, nfslock, and all other legacy
stuff in ten years time.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:25 AM
shmuel siegel
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

Richard Hughes wrote:

On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 23:36 -0600, Dax Kelson wrote:


I would argue strongly that this change should not be made for the
following reasons (in no particular order):



Does it matter? Seriously, we need to start X on ttyX and start ONE
mingetty on ttyX+1. Loading mingetty on 6 terminals takes time.

Who uses more than one mingetty anyway? Surely the sort of person
comfortable with the RSI-inducing ctrl-alt-Fx is the sort of person that
can edit a config file and increase the number if we provide one by
default.

I was thinking about trying to tackle the boot time of fedora (and get
to the 5 second nirvana), but I fear that bikeshedding like this will
mean we are still loading sendmail, isdn, nfslock, and all other legacy
stuff in ten years time.

Richard.



You are responding to an issue that no one is bringing up. No one is
talking about how many mingettys are launched. On the other hand you are
declaring as a resolved starting point the very thing that is being
questioned. The question is "who gets tty1".


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:31 AM
Richard Hughes
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 11:25 +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
> You are responding to an issue that no one is bringing up. No one is
> talking about how many mingettys are launched. On the other hand you
> are declaring as a resolved starting point the very thing that is
> being questioned. The question is "who gets tty1".

Who cares? If X lives on tty7 and you get an extra flicker, then that's
bad. If it lives on ttyX and it doesn't flicker, it's good.

The sort of person that even knows what a tty is, is probably in a
position where they can change it to whatever they want. Seriously, had
anyone done any research on the number of Fedora users who even use
ttys?

This isn't a community decision decided by +1 or -1's. This is the
package maintainer (and upstream) changing with a good reason.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:35 AM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

Richard Hughes wrote:

I was thinking about trying to tackle the boot time of fedora (and get
to the 5 second nirvana)


Great go for it! The solution to bikeshed color discussions is to just ignore
them and make the changes in rawhide. If too much people scream too loudly one
can always revert the changes or come up with a better way



mean we are still loading sendmail, isdn, nfslock, and all other legacy
stuff in ten years time.



Talking about the nfs (and related rpc daemons) I recently had a good idea for
those, some will hate it, but those are the people who so no to anything
looking like progress, so I say lets just ignore them.


This idea is taken from some work I've done recently to stop the iscsi related
daemons from starting unnecessary be default, something which has become
relevant as the libvirt stuff drags in iscsi-initiator-utils on very
installation that has libvirt, of which there are quite a few.


So the idea is to patch all the initscripts which currently only get started by
default for NFS, to as the first thing in their start method grep for nfs in
/etc/fstab and if that is not found exit quietly without doing anything further.


Then to make manual mounting of nfs exports not in fstab work properly, the
suggested fix is to patch mount to check if the necessary daemons are running
and if not start them. Since this will probably turn out to be distro specific
I think it would be best to have a checknfsdaemons shell script in some
standard location provided by the distro and let mount call that before each
nfs mount. (Oh the horror an additional entire fork and exec on each nfs mount,
hello people this is going over the network, forget about the fork and exec
cost, thank you).


Regards,

Hans

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:38 AM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:35:39AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Richard Hughes wrote:
>> I was thinking about trying to tackle the boot time of fedora (and get
>> to the 5 second nirvana)
>
> Great go for it! The solution to bikeshed color discussions is to just
> ignore them and make the changes in rawhide. If too much people scream
> too loudly one can always revert the changes or come up with a better way
>

I think that it should be done the other way around, propose the changes
that affect the whole distro on th is list, listen to what people have
to say, or, more importantly what code they have to propose if they
don't like a given design, and then implement it with all the concerned
parties.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:45 AM
Richard Hughes
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 10:38 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> I think that it should be done the other way around, propose the
> changes that affect the whole distro on th is list, listen to what
> people have to say, or, more importantly what code they have to
> propose if they don't like a given design, and then implement it with
> all the concerned parties.

I don't think it can work like that.

1. send a mail saying sendmail won't be on the default desktop install
2. heat hands on ensuing flames

The problem with fedora-devel-list is that the 0.01% of most technical
users are there, most unable to understand that normal people don't use
an smtp server or setup nfs.

If we include everything we've ever started by default in the future
versions, and any of the latest cool new stuff, our boot times are going
to get longer, and our base install bigger.

Design by committee just doesn't work.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:45 AM
Richard Hughes
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 10:38 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> I think that it should be done the other way around, propose the
> changes that affect the whole distro on th is list, listen to what
> people have to say, or, more importantly what code they have to
> propose if they don't like a given design, and then implement it with
> all the concerned parties.

I don't think it can work like that.

1. send a mail saying sendmail won't be on the default desktop install
2. heat hands on ensuing flames

The problem with fedora-devel-list is that the 0.01% of most technical
users are there, most unable to understand that normal people don't use
an smtp server or setup nfs.

If we include everything we've ever started by default in the future
versions, and any of the latest cool new stuff, our boot times are going
to get longer, and our base install bigger.

Design by committee just doesn't work.

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:46 AM
Till Maas
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

On Wed October 29 2008, Richard Hughes wrote:

> The sort of person that even knows what a tty is, is probably in a
> position where they can change it to whatever they want. Seriously, had
> anyone done any research on the number of Fedora users who even use
> ttys?

I use it every now and then to get pam_mount running, because then I need to
login as root, which is something I do not want to do via gdm. Also I need it
if the GUI does not start, which happens every now and then. This also
happens if I help some other Linux user. Then changing lots of the system
only to be able to debug the system decreases my motivation a lot. This is
also true for testing new Fedora releases, e.g. via a LiveCD. If I always
have to create my own LiveCD to test something, my motivation also goes away
pretty fast.

Regards,
Till
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 10-29-2008, 08:54 AM
Jeremy Sanders
 
Default Reasons to preseve X on tty7

Hans de Goede wrote:

> So the idea is to patch all the initscripts which currently only get
> started by default for NFS, to as the first thing in their start method
> grep for nfs in /etc/fstab and if that is not found exit quietly without
> doing anything further.

And this would break for people who are using autofs to mount nfs partition.
You also need to start nfsd if /etc/exports contains something.

--
http://jeremysanders.net/


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

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:50 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org