[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: how is pulseaudio supposed to work?

Le lundi 17 décembre 2007 à 10:36 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit :
> On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 16:34 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:24:04AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > 
> > > The virtual consoles will still be around, but really should only be an
> > > emergency fallback.  The right way to do this is to log in via gdm, and
> > > select a session that gives you a fullscreen shell (with tabs, windows,
> > > virtual desktops) etc.
> > 
> > A display manager should not need to be installed. On servers, for
> > example http servers you want an http server to be installed and that's 
> > all. No X server, not even X libraries (if possible).
> Yes, we're not talking about servers here.

Please don't repeat the NetworkManager "everything is a laptop with no
background services and we don't care about the rest" mess.

I personally have no problem making X a server requirement. X is nothing
compared to some of the bloated apps we have nowadays. The problem is
not X but X userspace infrastructure that assumes it can do all sorts of
wasteful things because it's in a user session. And it needs to be
streamlined for OLPC-like uses anyway. 

Purging the crazy X/non-X stack duplication we managed to grow and
drilling in desktop developers heads they need to be more careful would
more than make up for the X cost (a bad CLI solution to avoid X and a
bad X solution to avoid treating server cases makes two bad solutions
installed concurrently on most Fedora systems).

However I *do* have a problem with "everything is a complete gdm
session" approach. Where does stuff like sound/video PVR streaming
server fit? Is it supposed to grow a separate audio backend now?

Nicolas Mailhot

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]