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
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.
> > * there should be a unified method for chosing window/desktop manager or
> > whatever, since it gives the users some chances to do things without
2005/8/22, Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:55:14AM +0200, Paolo Pantaleo wrote:
> > 1) I think that the display mangaer should be choosen using
> > update-alternatives --confi x-display-manager
> > (btw: how is it made now?)
>
> The startup scripts for the various dis
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:55:14AM +0200, Paolo Pantaleo wrote:
> 1) I think that the display mangaer should be choosen using
> update-alternatives --confi x-display-manager
> (btw: how is it made now?)
The startup scripts for the various display managers pay attention to the
contents of the file
[I have stable installed]
I noticed some little issues concernig update-alternatives
1) I think that the display mangaer should be choosen using
update-alternatives --confi x-display-manager
(btw: how is it made now?)
2) I have gnome installed, but in
update-alternatives --config x-window-manage
5 matches
Mail list logo
