Page 1 of 1
linux x11 ?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:24 pm
by Sam111
I have been playing around with x11 linux stuff.
I know ctrl+ alt+f1 ,2,.... etc get you to different console screens and f7- f12 allow you to have 6 different xsessions in theory so you can have 6 different desktops running per linux machine.
I have create a .xinitrc file and started a gui program with no windows manager then with one so you can move the windows around...etc
Tried many different windows managers / desktops gnome , kde ,..etc on X11 and much more
But I am wondering how I can start multiple xsession on a linux machine.
When ever I go to another console and try to start another x11 session with xinit I get
Code: Select all
Fatal server error:
Server is already active for display 0
If this server is no longer running, remove /tmp/.X0-lock
and start again.
Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support
at http://wiki.x.org
for help.
ddxSigGiveUp: Closing log
I have tried to change the display but that doesn't seem to work DISPLAY=0:1 2,3...etc
but nothing...
I am probably miss typing something or not setting something.
If anybody knows how to start multiple xsession with multiple different desktops like gnome on one , kde on another ,...etc
Please let me know
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:41 pm
by turdus
xinit (as well as startx) is just a wrapper around the real server, X. See manual, eg.
http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.0/X.7.html
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:22 pm
by Brynet-Inc
Seriously? Linux X11? It's just X. It runs anywhere.
..and nobody uses the XFree86 implementation anymore.
http://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.6/doc/index.html
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:32 pm
by Jezze
Do you mean something like:
xinit ./mywm -display :1 -- :1 vt5
That should start your window manager (in this case called mywm) on tty5 and display 1
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:37 am
by Sam111
yup , thanks thats what I needed.
Also
startx -- :2 (,3,4...) work
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:06 am
by turdus
Brynet-Inc wrote:..and nobody uses the XFree86 implementation anymore.
Who cares? X specification is the same. That was the first result for googling "X server man".
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:54 pm
by Brynet-Inc
turdus wrote:Brynet-Inc wrote:..and nobody uses the XFree86 implementation anymore.
Who cares? X specification is the same. That was the first result for googling "X server man".
Look harder next time.
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:41 pm
by turdus
Brynet-Inc wrote:Look harder next time.
F*ckin' troll... YOU LOOK HARDER next time, before you write and make fool of yourself. X11 standard is a standard you know.
Tell me the difference between these manuals save default file path:
http://www.xfree86.org/current/Xserver.1.html
http://www.x.org/archive/X11R6.8.1/doc/Xserver.1.html
I help:
nothing.
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:51 pm
by Brynet-Inc
Again, you linked to outdated information for X11R6 instead of X11R7, the modular Xorg release.
There have been changes in both implementation and protocol (..which isn't relevant, as the protocol does not define the command-line arguments to the X server).
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:51 pm
by Combuster
turdus wrote:X11 standard is a standard you know.
X11 is a standardized
protocol. Each of the many
implementations is
not a standard. Giving a Xfree86 manual to an X.org user is like telling a Mac user to use DOS instead.
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:07 am
by turdus
Brynet-Inc wrote:Again, you linked to outdated information
Really? Let me see.
http://www.x.org/archive/X11R6.8.1/doc/Xserver.1.html
Code: Select all
Options
Many X servers have device-specific command line options. See the manual pages for the individual servers for more details; a list of server-specific manual pages is provided in the SEE ALSO section below.
All of the X servers accept the command line options described below. Some X servers may have alternative ways of providing the parameters described here, but the values provided via the command line options should override values specified via other mechanisms.
:displaynumber
The X server runs as the given displaynumber, which by default is 0. If multiple X servers are to run simultaneously on a host, each must have a unique display number. See the DISPLAY NAMES section of the X(7) manual page to learn how to specify which display number clients should try to use.
Code: Select all
OPTIONS
Many X servers have device-specific command line options. See the manual pages for the individual servers for more details; a list of server-specific manual pages is provided in the SEE ALSO section below.
All of the X servers accept the command line options described below. Some X servers may have alternative ways of providing the parameters described here, but the values provided via the command line options should override values specified via other mechanisms.
:displaynumber
The X server runs as the given displaynumber, which by default is 0. If multiple X servers are to run simultaneously on a host, each must have a unique display number. See the DISPLAY NAMES section of the X(7) manual page to learn how to specify which display number clients should try to use.
sarcasm
Oh my God, they're totally different!!! They do not match word by word at all !!!
/sarcasm
Re: linux x11 ?
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:20 am
by turdus
berkus wrote:Looks like turdus have never used X, neither old nor the new modular xorg. He would've spotted the differences right away.
Mistaken, I'm using X for over a decade now on many different systems. I've used it even on VMS. That's why I'm sure as far as only display number concerned, no matter which revision or implementation is used. X11's display specification is standard, and in full form goes like this:
(host):(display number).(screen number)
That's why Xfree86, Xorg, Cygwin/X etc, R6 and R7 accept it in the same way. This hasn't changed since 1987. The correct information was in the link, and yes, I did not checked the url's version part, I checked what it says about display number which was appropriate, and not outdated. I would have checked the version if the question was about something more specific, but it was not. Period.
Cheers.