Tried Pulse Audio Again--No Good For A11y

[Lennart Poettering]

On Tue, 23.09.08 15:50, Les Mikesell (lesmikesell at gmail.com) wrote:

>>>>> As far as I know we again allow multiple simultaneous X logins by the
>>>>> same user.
>>>> If we do, it's broken.
>>> Why shouldn't I be able to do as many xdm logins as I want as the same 
>>> user?  This isn't an X issue.
>> Because many apps don't distuingish state from configuration cleanly.
>
> So you'd cripple the system because there are some bad apps?

Oh my, Lennart cripples computers. I should be banned. Just like DRM!

>> For example: you configure your gnome panel to include a clock
>> applet. Then you open another session and add a network monitor applet
>> to it. What do you expect from this? That both panels will always stay
>> perfectly in sync and the network monitor applet is transparently
>> added to the first session as well? When you log out from both, what
>> happens when you log in again, do you get the panel layout from the
>> first session or from the second session?
>
> How is this different than running 2 instances of vi?  If you edit the same 
> file at the same time you'll have a conflict.  That doesn't mean you should 
> cripple the system to the point where it can't run 2 instances of
> vi.

vi has static config files. They are only read on vi's startup. 

OTOH GNOME usually does instant-apply. I.e. what you configure is
immediately executed and saved for later.

You did not respond to my question what you'd think the proper
behaviour would be for gnome-panel. I'll take that as an
acknowledgment that you understand that the problem exists.

>> The question is: is it worth bothering at all with questions like the
>> panel question above? Since the feature is redundant we might simply
>> say: forget it, let's disable multiple logins and the problem is
>> gone. 
>
> Windows terminal services has gotten this more or less right since at least 
> windows 2000 server that included 2 licenses for administrative use.  If 
> they can do it with an interface that wasn't designed to be remote or 
> multiuser, it can't be that hard.

Are you sure you can log in twice on Win2k as exactly the same user id?

> But, if it can't be done right, the WM should enforce it and give you a 
> choice of killing the old session when you attempt a new login instead of 
> just letting random things fail.

Nah, if at all that's the job of the dm or the sm, not the wm.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net         ICQ# 11060553
http://0pointer.net/lennart/           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4