# LXDM port



## gour (Aug 10, 2011)

There is discussion on the PCBSD mailing list about default login manager for Xfce, LXDE and other lighter desktop environments and conclusion is that LXDM would be a nice/better fit than the present GDM.

However, I wonder why there is no LXDM port available considering there is LXDE "meta" port available?


Sincerely,
Gour


----------



## SirDice (Aug 10, 2011)

I haven't looked at LXDM yet but it's possible it contains too much "linuxism" which may prevent it from working properly on FreeBSD.

Have you tried contacting the lxde-meta port maintainer?


----------



## vermaden (Aug 10, 2011)

Why not SLIM, then ...


----------



## SirDice (Aug 10, 2011)

vermaden said:
			
		

> Why not SLIM, then ...



I'll second that. It has a really nice FreeBSD theme :e

One drawback is that it doesn't support XDMCP. Most people don't need it though.


----------



## gour (Aug 11, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> Have you tried contacting the lxde-meta port maintainer?



I posted to 'ports' lists first...still waiting for some reply.


----------



## gour (Aug 11, 2011)

vermaden said:
			
		

> Why not SLIM, then ...



I suggested it, but it's not enough user-friendly - no support for selecting language/locale, nor user-lists.


----------



## j0hnny (Oct 29, 2012)

Any updates on this yet? LXDM on FreeBSD would be really nice.


----------



## Markand (Nov 21, 2012)

vermaden said:
			
		

> Why not SLIM, then ...



SLiM does not support login.conf(5) that's the major issue why I don't use it. But Im guessing if LXDM can...


----------



## Markand (Nov 21, 2012)

At a glance, I didn't see many linuxisms. I try tonight to compile it and run it. Stay tuned


----------



## j0hnny (Nov 23, 2012)

Markand said:
			
		

> At a glance, I didn't see many linuxisms. I try tonight to compile it and run it. Stay tuned



Cool. Keep us posted. If LXDM can work on FreeBSD that would be pretty awesome.


----------



## j0hnny (Dec 2, 2012)

Ok we now know what the problem is. The Linuxism in LXDM that is stopping it from compiling is:


```
ifdef ret=setsockopt(self_server_fd,SOL_SOCKET,SO_PASSCRED,&on,sizeof(on));
```

SO_PASSCRED is the Linuxism. I can't figure out how to solve it so I suppose if anyone else has the time maybe dabble in it and try to sort it.


----------



## j0hnny (Dec 2, 2012)

j0hnny said:
			
		

> Ok we now know what the problem is. The Linuxism in LXDM that is stopping it from compiling is:
> 
> 
> ```
> ...



Sorry it's not that it is: 


```
ret=setsockopt(self_server_fd,SOL_SOCKET,SO_PASSCRED,&on,sizeof(on));
```

The files are located here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/lxdm/files/lxdm 0.3.0/

The file in question is lxcom.c.


----------



## cpm@ (Dec 2, 2012)

j0hnny said:
			
		

> Ok we now know what the problem is. The Linuxism in LXDM that is stopping it from compiling is:
> 
> ifdef ret=setsockopt(self_server_fd,SOL_SOCKET,SO_PASSCRED,&on,sizeof(on));
> 
> SO_PASSCRED is the Linuxism. I can't figure out how to solve it so I suppose if anyone else has the time maybe dabble in it and try to sort it.



Someone, trying to install lxdm-0.4.1 have raised the issue.


----------



## j0hnny (Dec 2, 2012)

Ok a patch was made: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0bCrZVQ_98OaV9lckNCcWg5LTA

try it and see if it works. I don't have FreeBSD right now so I can't test it out.


----------



## jwele (Dec 3, 2012)

Whole lot of genius in this thread. Thanks for the help with LXDM, much appreciated. Will set up Virtual Machine tonight to test it out.


----------



## sremick (Dec 19, 2012)

cpu82 said:
			
		

> Someone, trying to install lxdm-0.4.1 have raised the issue.



That really reads confusingly as it contradicts itself, due to bad grammar. Unless I'm incorrect, I see two instances where "can" should really be "can't". I worry the bad and confusing writing will cause it to be passed over.


----------



## cpm@ (Dec 20, 2012)

sremick said:
			
		

> That really reads confusingly as it contradicts itself, due to bad grammar. Unless I'm incorrect, I see two instances where "can" should really be "can't". I worry the bad and confusing writing will cause it to be passed over.



About porting status will be better wait a new report. Linuxism is the worst obstacle to build and if can't be build is nonportable.

A better case against linuxism is that portability encourages modularity, which is good for reasons far beyond portability. Having to do some things in a different module because they can't be done the same way on all systems encourages you to separate concerns, which leads to code that's easier to reason about and, therefore, less likely to be buggy.


----------



## j0hnny (Dec 20, 2012)

I mean I'm sure it COULD be ported but if it can't, someone could at least devise a special version or alternative for BSD. Still I can't see where there may be a problem. If Gnome 3 is on its way to being ported to BSD (or may already be for all I know) then LXDM shouldn't be too much of a problem.


----------

