Gdm removed when sugar WM removed

Marko Vojinovic vvmarko at
Sun Oct 23 20:26:37 UTC 2011

On Sunday 23 October 2011 21:14:17 Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 10/23/2011 12:55 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > How do you determine whether or not a given wm needs gdm? Any wm can
> > equally well use kdm instead of gdm, so it is actually a conditional
> > dependency --- "if there is no other dm installed, and if there is some
> > wm which depends on the presence of a dm, don't uninstall it".
> Can you tell me one good reason that a dm should be a dependency of any wm?

Well, if you intend to run a wm in runlevel 5, you do need a dm, right? The 
problem in my view is that this is a many-to-many mapping, so a given wm may 
depend on *either* a gdm or kdm or xdm or whatever, but not on any particular 
one of them.

Although, strictly speaking, you can always boot into runlevel 3 and start 
your wm from there manually, so the wm doesn't strictly depend on the presence 
of a dm (and the formal answer to your question is "no"). However, most of the 
people typically boot into runlevel 5, so it makes sense to have a dm whenever 
you have a wm installed. For me that is a good enough reason. ;-)

Best, :-)

More information about the users mailing list