PDA

View Full Version : kdm config



dust_
3rd April 2007, 08:54 AM
This is driving me nuts. I want to have dwm as my wm, or at the very least be able to select it in the kdm boot up menu. Its got my enlightenement there np, but I can't for the life of me boot into dwm. I installed dwm from an rpm, its executables are available, but I can't find where to configure kdm's session options. I went so far as to creat an ~/.xinitrc file with exec dwm in there, nothing. Made of a copy of the preconfigured /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc file, then deleted the xinitrc file and recreated one with just /usr/bin/dwm in it and it still boots up to the default one as if I hadn't done a damn thing!

To make it even more annoying, I want to get rid of kde for now and have a simple system with just dwm and enlightenment, but yum won't work because I'm not connected to my network right now. This system, when in my office, needs to function as a standalone so I can't connect it to my office's network. Anyway I can force yum to just do what I say without trying to connect to repos?

lmo
3rd April 2007, 05:31 PM
This is as nutty as the teamed up efforts of gnome, kde and fedora gets.

You must ensure that there is a file for each "gdm session" option in the directory:
/usr/share/xsessions

The file name must end in .desktop, and for twm, mine looks like this (twm.desktop):
[Desktop Entry]
Encoding=UTF-8
Type=XSession
Exec=twm
Name=twm
Comment=twm window manager

Now, then, there must also be a file for each "gdm session" option in the directory:
/usr/share/switchdesk

The file name must start with Xclients, and for twm, mine looks like this (Xclients.twm):
#!/bin/sh
################################################## ######################
#
# Twm
#
################################################## ######################

exec ~/.xsession

Now then, since my Xclients.twm says to run ~/.xsession (or whatever,) you must ensure that that file does what you want.
My ~/.xsession may look like this:
xterm &
twm

So, it is no problem at all to become thoroughly confused.

I haven't used kdm, but I am confident that it is equally discombobulated.

dust_
4th April 2007, 09:50 AM
Thanks for the help. That's a blatantly ridiculous way of doing things. Yum's apperently inability to handle my applications on a standalone box arse also silly. I'm going back to arch.

u-noneinc-s
4th April 2007, 10:13 AM
Thanks for the help. That's a blatantly ridiculous way of doing things. Yum's apperently inability to handle my applications on a standalone box arse also silly. I'm going back to arch.
yum has it's flaws, but I hope this decision has nothing to do with what I said about yum wanting to take bash and rpm and yum with it with the removal of Gnome. I haven't checked back with that thread, but if you haven't either, I add a reply later that the problem occurred on a bloated semi broken install of FC6 (actually an upgrade from FC3 to 5 to 6), and when I tried again on a clean install (after your "complaint"), there was no attempt to remove yum or rpm or bash, so I attribute the rpm yum and bash being marked for removal to the semi broken system (or the upgrades through versions).

I agree that there is lots of room for improvement for yum, and I haven't tried any other OS's yet so I can't compare it with anything else. Before giving up the ship, you might try smart package manager.

From what I've read, F7 is giving the option of desktop environments so those dependencies my no longer exist. I actually prefer some Gnome apps over KDE so I keep both Environments installed. I only wanted to get rid on Gnome on the other install because it had become very bloated over the course of a year and a half (or 2).

lmo
4th April 2007, 03:38 PM
Good. But I do not believe that there is any distro out there that does not have some stuff that is blatantly rediculous. However, I am curious about arch, maybe I'' look into trying it sometime.

dust_
5th April 2007, 05:21 AM
No, u-noneinc-s, its not because of that. For one, a package manager shouldn't be limited to working only when there's a net connection present. That's just stupid. Two, there is too much noise in the system. What I mean is how convuleted the config scripts are. A big factor that always attracted me to linux was that when I wanted to config something, all I needed was the man page for the application and vim. I'd be done and having things running how I wanted within an hour. I spent 4 or more hours the other night simply trying to get dwm as a choice in my kdm sessions menu..and I still haven't been able to get it to work! Fedora has crossed the line from being helpful, to getting in my way.

Imo, give a try to arch. Its downfalls are that it doesn't hold your hand, doesn't have anywhere near the package mainteners as gentoo or fedora, but I've yet to install a package in the past 2 years that;s been buggy or unstable, and a much smaller userbase (though for the most part, the users are pretty advanced without the debian elitism).

Pacman (arch's pkg manager) is a binary, repo based manager. Arch uses SANE init scripting (BSD like init scripts), and the groove of it just fits with me. Doesn't get in my way when I want to tinker, since most of the config files I had to write myself when installing.

Thanks to everyone who helped me out here. Fedora is a good system, just not my jive.

lmo
5th April 2007, 04:03 PM
I set up my DVD and CD's from a book as repos for yum on Fedora for core and extras repos. People complain that I did that because they say I'm not getting the latest and greatest (or broke) stuff. As for configurations, I think that all of the distros meddle with the config locations. Everybody would be better off if they would all use some standard classic locations and techniques according to the man pages.