Remove of Daemon in Display Manager
In these edits, you remove Daemon method without an Edit summary. I am just want to double check why it is removed. Is it broken? Is it have some problem or disadvantage? -- Fengchao (talk) 12:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- It isn't broken... it is just incorrect and to load via rc.conf. You lose the ability to use init for its purpose. init 3 should be straight into console, and init 5 should be the multi-user/graphical. A Display Manager (while it can be run as a daemon) is not a daemon and shouldn't be treated like one. They should be loaded through inittab, where they can actually behave properly. In fact, you could setup several display managers in inittab if you wanted to. Sorry I didn't include an Edit summary, but the fact that you can load DMs through rc.conf has been stripped from most actual display manager pages already, I was just cleaning up extra ones as I find them or they are mentioned in #archlinux... is there a macro to get the User: User talk stuff like there is for --> 16:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC) ? thanks
- Just use
- I know inittab is better long time ago, but just know the reason now. :) It is better to clearly telling people that it is incorrect and give the reason. Maybe something like "This method is deprecated and users of this method should change to inittab method."
- Fengchao (talk) 04:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- Just use
Declare more mirrors for a file
- As I said in the summary, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Yes PKGBUILDs are bash scripts, but what you put on their goes against so many things in the Packageing guidelines, and you should never do that in a PKGBUILD gtmanfred (talk) 10:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
- > […] goes against so many things in the Packageing guidelines
- For example?
- --Grufo [ contribs | talk ] 11:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
- they are variables, don't run functions in them. If the file no longer exists, the PKGBUILD should be updated. check what one of the pacman developers said in your forum posts, or come to #archlinux or #archlinux-pacman to actually discuss why it is wrong gtmanfred (talk) 11:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)