On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 05:39:07PM -0000, William Pietri wrote:
> Aesthetically, making something vital (UI startup) depend on something
> decorative (splash screens) seems odd. Perhaps future versions of this
> can be made more robust.
To clarify, plymouth is not "merely decorative". It is the boot-time
interface used for interacting with the user regarding any boot problems; so
it's always present, and it needs to hand off control of the console
reliably to lightdm, which means that the lightdm job can't start until it
knows for sure plymouth has started up.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 05:39:07PM -0000, William Pietri wrote:
> Aesthetically, making something vital (UI startup) depend on something
> decorative (splash screens) seems odd. Perhaps future versions of this
> can be made more robust.
To clarify, plymouth is not "merely decorative". It is the boot-time
interface used for interacting with the user regarding any boot problems; so
it's always present, and it needs to hand off control of the console
reliably to lightdm, which means that the lightdm job can't start until it
knows for sure plymouth has started up.