Re: [oe-core][PATCHv10 7/7] xuser-account: merge with xserver-nodm-init

[Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com>]

On Tue Sep 23, 2025 at 6:38 PM CDT, Randolph Sapp via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> On Tue Sep 23, 2025 at 5:57 PM CDT, Richard Purdie wrote:
>> On Tue, 2025-09-23 at 17:51 -0500, rs@ti.com wrote:
>>> From: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com>
>>> 
>>> Merge the xuser-account recipe with xserver-nodm-init, since:
>>> 
>>>  - This is the only recipe dependent on it
>>
>> This is not a good reason to merge them. The reason they were kept
>> separate was so that people could replace the user with their own user
>> setup whilst reusing the xserver init code (or vice versa).
>
> Sure, but now this is all encompassed by the virtual-emptty-conf providers, as
> the conf dictates what user is to be automatically logged in. This conf needs to
> be kept in sync with whatever user is submitted.

Richard, did this point make sense? Are you still in favor of keeping the user
and display manager config separate?

> If people want to forgo managing the conf and just manage their own users then
> they can just set the preferred rprovider for virtual-emptty-conf to emptty-conf
> and add their own users in their own recipes. This will give them the desktop
> like experience where they are greeted with a console login prompt and session
> picker on tty7.
>
> I guess this also means that the x-session-manager recipes should be updated to
> provide their desktop files for their sessions instead of us doing that in
> xserver-nodm-init though. I may need to address that in another revision.
>
>>>  - This matches the current behavior in weston-init
>>>  - Running x11 as root is no longer a supported path in
>>>    xserver-nodm-init
>>
>> Does rootless X work everywhere now? 
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>
> Uh, that's a good question. I didn't think there were any particular usecases
> left that were limited by rootless X. It's been a desktop thing for so long now
> the only issues I remember were specifically around the way the handoff to the
> user account occurred.
>
> Gentoo cites the difference between using a login manager / display manager vs
> the old suid scheme as being problematic for remote start depending on how seat
> management is handled. We didn't seem to be relying on that behavior so I want
> to say it's fine.
>
> - Randolph