Difference between revisions of "Talk:Xinit"
(→exec on last line…: re) |
(→exec on last line…: close) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Ok. So it isn't necessary to background all daemon processes. Looking at other processes though, it's not clear to me what to do. In the this talk page:[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Talk:X_resources xresources] there was an issue with backgrounding xrdb statements for intance. The solution was to not background it. I guess there isn't a general rule for all processes, because it depends how the different processes behave, but it seems backgrounding in most cases is more generally adviced to not override/delay the xinit process. I don't know here, maybe you got some more expericence. -- [[User:Roygbiv|Roygbiv]] 02:04, 29 August 2011 (EDT) | ::Ok. So it isn't necessary to background all daemon processes. Looking at other processes though, it's not clear to me what to do. In the this talk page:[https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Talk:X_resources xresources] there was an issue with backgrounding xrdb statements for intance. The solution was to not background it. I guess there isn't a general rule for all processes, because it depends how the different processes behave, but it seems backgrounding in most cases is more generally adviced to not override/delay the xinit process. I don't know here, maybe you got some more expericence. -- [[User:Roygbiv|Roygbiv]] 02:04, 29 August 2011 (EDT) | ||
| − | == exec on last line… == | + | ==<s>exec on last line…</s>== |
Someone please explain AlexanderR that he shouldn’t revert edits blindly… See https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Xinitrc&action=historysubmit&diff=241683&oldid=241177 I’m not up for this little game :( [[User:Stqn|Stqn]] ([[User talk:Stqn|talk]]) 15:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC) | Someone please explain AlexanderR that he shouldn’t revert edits blindly… See https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Xinitrc&action=historysubmit&diff=241683&oldid=241177 I’m not up for this little game :( [[User:Stqn|Stqn]] ([[User talk:Stqn|talk]]) 15:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:{{Note|Make sure to uncomment only one {{ic|exec}} line, since that will be the last command run from the script; all the following lines will just be ignored.}} | :{{Note|Make sure to uncomment only one {{ic|exec}} line, since that will be the last command run from the script; all the following lines will just be ignored.}} | ||
:-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 12:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | :-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 12:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::Implemented, close. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 10:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 10:14, 13 April 2013
Backgrounding
The article points out that any process (e.g. programs and daemons) preceding the 'exec WM/DE' statement should be backgrounded. This sounds logical in order to execute all of the desired statements (included the WM/DM launcher), without waiting for a process to exit. Looking at the file examples (some provided by myself), I noticed that 'xrdb ...' is not backgrounded. This made me test my own config, without backgrounding anything except the 'xscreensaver' daemon statement, and the results are the same - only I don't have a lot of backgrounded processes when using 'ps -a'. This matter confuses me a little so, my question is: are there any general rule on what processes should be backgrounded in .xinitrc? Starting daemons is one example of processes that should be backgrounded. --Roygbiv 16:55, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
- I'm using urxvtcd and it doesn't have to be backgrounded in order for dwm to start. If I use urxvt instead, dwm won't start unless I background urxvt or it starts only after I exit urxvt. -- Karol 17:13, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
- Ok. So it isn't necessary to background all daemon processes. Looking at other processes though, it's not clear to me what to do. In the this talk page:xresources there was an issue with backgrounding xrdb statements for intance. The solution was to not background it. I guess there isn't a general rule for all processes, because it depends how the different processes behave, but it seems backgrounding in most cases is more generally adviced to not override/delay the xinit process. I don't know here, maybe you got some more expericence. -- Roygbiv 02:04, 29 August 2011 (EDT)
exec on last line…
Someone please explain AlexanderR that he shouldn’t revert edits blindly… See https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Xinitrc&action=historysubmit&diff=241683&oldid=241177 I’m not up for this little game :( Stqn (talk) 15:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Eheh don't take it personally :) What AlexanderR means is that the note shouldn't try to teach what happens if a command is in a non-executed code block, and I agree with him.
- In order to avoid an edit war, let's try to improve the wording here, my proposal is:
- Note: Make sure to uncomment only one
execline, since that will be the last command run from the script; all the following lines will just be ignored. - -- Kynikos (talk) 12:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC)