GNOME 3.14 Still Depends On ConsoleKit, More Systemd Still Planned

[phoronix]

Phoronix: GNOME 3.14 Still Depends On ConsoleKit, More Systemd Still Planned

Some plans for the GNOME 3.14 cycle didn't materialize but they're still being developed for future GNOME updates...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc4Mjg

[Redi44]

GG

I'm here only for the shitstorm.

[uid313]

KDE

How will KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment and other desktop environments tackle user sessions?

[Awesomeness]

How will KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment and other desktop environments tackle user sessions?

AFAIK Plasma for X11 will not require logind but Plasma for Wayland will.

[genx]

TL;DR : "We, GNOME, did not do what we said we would do, but I will explain how wrong are non-GNOME people on every matter."

[oleid]

How will KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment and other desktop environments tackle user sessions?

KDE will also support systemd-based user sessions. Yet, they won't remove the old shell-script way. Furthermore, I found this on the other desktops:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTEyNjc

[plonoma]

Do like the advancements in systemD, even if it's not perfect.

LoginD should be renamed to sessionD or userSessionD or something like that, since it also concerns itself with logout procedures.
SystemD could use many improvements in behaviour and maybe here and there better names for functions, daemons, etc...

[Ericg]

Do like the advancements in systemD, even if it's not perfect.

LoginD should be renamed to sessionD or userSessionD or something like that, since it also concerns itself with logout procedures.
SystemD could use many improvements in behaviour and maybe here and there better names for functions, daemons, etc...

systemd* logind* (Systemd* If starting a sentence in english. See: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ Spelling)

The rename for logind is also unnecessary since its kind of assumed that whatever handles login would also handle logout, its the same process just in reverse. Also as far as the "many improvements" systemd could use, you'll get a much better reaction if you explicitly state what you don't like. Just off the top of my head I can't think of any daemons that need renames, given they all tend to be (function)+d to denote its function and that its a daemon.

[marcoms]

systemd* logind* (Systemd* If starting a sentence in english. See: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ Spelling)

The source a) starts a sentance with a lowercased "systemd" and b) only says that they find it OK (and they "don't like it either")

[RahulSundaram]

The source a) starts a sentance with a lowercased "systemd" and b) only says that they find it OK (and they "don't like it either")

Do you have any trouble understanding what it says? It seems pretty clear to me.

"Yes, it is written systemd, not system D or System D, or even SystemD. And it isn't system d either. Why? Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d. And since systemd manages the system, it's called systemd. It's that simple. But then again, if all that appears too simple to you, call it (but never spell it!) System Five Hundred since D is the roman numeral for 500 (this also clarifies the relation to System V, right?). The only situation where we find it OK to use an uppercase letter in the name (but don't like it either) is if you start a sentence with systemd. On high holidays you may also spell it s?st?md. But then again, Syst?me D is not an acceptable spelling and something completely different (though kinda fitting). "