Re: [tlug] Running without Gnome/KDE/xfce/whatever. (was: Ubuntu 16.04-LTS Japanese Text Input)

[Attila Kinali <attila@example.com>]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 03:11:56 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com> wrote:

>  > The user part you have to start yourself using `dbus-launch` in
>  > your .xinitrc/.Xsession
> 
> Well, no, not on Debian; the system provides default scripts that do
> fine for most users with a bit of customization (ie, setting
> appropriate alternatives for /usr/bin/x-window-manager and
> /usr/bin/x-session-manager).  *If* you provide your own .xinitrc or
> .Xsession, that will completely replace the corresponding system
> script, but that's rarely necessary.

Well.. my setup is from a time, where Xfree86 3.3.6 was HOT!
(I wonder why i can even remember the version?) and these
nice wrappers didn't exist yet. I would like to say that my
setup evolved from then, but truth is, that it's pretty much
the same with only minor tweaks here and there (like for having more
than just 480x320 pixels on the monitor)

 
>  > > There's too much s**t that barfs, spasms, and dies if dbus isn't
>  > > available (why?)
>  > 
>  > Because dbus has become the defacto IPC mechanism
> 
> I understand that.  Software should degrade gracefully if resources
> (such as a system tray or dbus) are unavailable.  That's all I'm
> saying.  Sometimes it can't (eg, the notify daemon is useless without
> IPC), of course.  But I've run into programs that refuse to run
> without dbus even though I personally didn't need the features they
> implement via dbus.

Because lots of people don't think that far. Everyone has udev installed,
or not? And you are running linux too! And your editor is for sure nano!

Being self-contained or at least having a low number of dependencies
is not on-vogue anymore. Instead authors make many assumptions about
how your system looks like and lable it as user error when it those
assumptions do not hold. :-(


>  > for all kind of applications, even though the ICCCM explicitly
>  > forbids any IPC outside X11.
> 
> No, it doesn't (unless it's been seriously revised for the worse since
> I last needed to look at it closely).  The ICCCM certainly discourages
> non-X IPC, because it prevents communication with clients running on
> other hosts, but there are many reasons why a client would use non-X
> IPC, even with other X clients.  Of course the most common reason for
> using non-X IPC is because the other process isn't an X client.

I cannot find that part in the ICCCM (definite lack of chocolate)
but i was sure it was a clear MUST NOT... but maybe i'm getting
old and senile....

				Attila Kinali
-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
                 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson