2005/8/26, Marcel Gschwandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 11:50 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: > > > > I think that * update-alternatives is a good facility > > > > It isn't, really. > IMHO it is.
Thnx fot the support Marcel, moreover i want to say that update-alternatives is documented in Debian Reference Manual, and it have a user interface, so it is not "internal". > > > > * there should be a unified method for chosing window/desktop manager or > > > whatever, since it gives the users some chances to do things without much > > > pain, and make easy to document and learn how things works > > > > No, actually a user should never be messing with the alternatives system. > > Further, users don't need to know and shouldn't have to know how things > > work. > Ok, not the average user, but root. I don't think that Paolo wanted each > user on the system to be able to change things with update-alternatives, > I think with user he meant a person with Debian installed on his > workstation, so this user would in fact have root privileges. > > > > > So, is update-alternatives the standard method? If not which is the > > > standard method? > > > > The standard method is to actually launch the environment you want. Gdm > > provides session files for this purpose, as does KDM. Xdm uses your > > ~/.xsession file. > Thats right, but update-alternatives would be the right place to set the > default one ( > In fact, so i think. Now just the last you install (kde, gnome, or whatever) let you configure, throught his own script, display manager and default desktop, and this is not good i think. Moreover there are a lot of single user Debian computer, and since Debian is one of the best distros about integrity and "out of the box" working, it is not so strange that a Debian root is kind of novice and doesn't know bash scripting, or other difficult things. PAolo -- if you have a minute to spend pleas visit my photogrphy site: http://mypic.altervista.org
