Re: gnome-session proposal

On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 01:45 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 25.06.08 19:07, William Jon McCann (mccann jhu edu) wrote:
> > We can still support applications that only know if they should
> > inhibit "just in time" by emitting a signal when a logout is
> > requested.  The applications can then take an inhibit in response to
> > that signal.
> This part sounds racy. Is it?
> Apropos, since we are talking about session management here: have you
> guys ever thought of reuseíng upstart for managing session processes? The
> problem that an init system and a session manager have is the same:
> doing lifecycle management of processes and all kinds of fancy
> monitoring of them.

But session shutdown is interactive, and system shutdown isn't. That's a
big difference. I also don't think that init systems have the concept of

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]