Well, personally, I'd much prefer it if remote login could *attach* to an existing local session, e.g. the way RDP / Terminal Services works on Windows. (AFAIK a Wayland compositor *could* almost do that…)
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Michał Zegan <[email protected]> wrote: > Ahm, I understand, Although it's actually a pitty. I believe it could be > useful in some cases notably remote login, not quite sure though. > > > W dniu 22.08.2015 o 16:58, Mantas Mikulėnas pisze: > > Well, you just wouldn't have more than one graphical session. That's part > of the general plan afaik. > > Note that this is already half-broken, because some of those programs > actually *expect* to be unique *per user* – e.g. dconf-daemon for writing > to the dconf db – and having two copies of it in two sessions might be bad… > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2015, 13:36 Michał Zegan < <[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> I believe, although may be wrong, that session buses were used to >> enforce single instances of programs, like a program registered a name >> on dbus and another instance of the same program could not run. >> How would it affect user buses in case of multiple graphical user >> sessions? >> _______________________________________________ >> systemd-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel > > -- Mantas Mikulėnas <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
