Difference between revisions of "Talk:Xinit"

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 exec line, 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)

Implemented, close. -- Kynikos (talk) 10:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)