man update-alternatives has no mention of how the priorities of alternatives originate. The most reasonable explanation I can imagine is that any new alternative is assigned a lower priority than extant alternatives. Correct?
My example from last July. peter@dalton:~$ update-alternatives --display x-window-manager x-window-manager - auto mode link currently points to /usr/bin/openbox /usr/bin/openbox - priority 90 slave x-window-manager.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/openbox.1.gz /usr/bin/xmonad - priority 20 Current 'best' version is '/usr/bin/openbox'. Suppose that I prefer xmonad to openbox. One way to indulge my prefence would be to somehow impose it in the operation of startx. Apparently this is the effect of the first instruction in http://wiki.debian.org/Xmonad, "... add STARTUP=x-window-manager to your ~/.xsessionrc." A second strategy would be to find a way to raise the priority of xmonad. If my original speculation above is correct, this might be achieved by de-installing both alternatives and reinstalling in the desired order. Alternatively, by using update-alternatives directly. update-alternatives --remove x-window-manager /usr/bin/xmonad update-alternatives --install x-window-manager x-window-manager /usr/bin/xmonad 100 This would give xmonad top priority system wide and should work for a display manager as well as for startx. Comments welcome. ... Peter E. -- 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 12 Tel +13606390202 Bcc: peasthope at shaw.ca http://carnot.yi.org/ "http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/index.html#Itinerary " -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171057907.37139.24988@cantor.invalid
