[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: XDMCP Core 3



On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 15:26, Peter Backlund wrote:
> tor 2005-01-20 klockan 11:20 +0000 skrev Jonathan Andrews:
> > On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 08:14, Mark McLoughlin wrote: 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 22:43 +0000, Jonathan Andrews wrote:
> > > > Is XDMCP, remote X bust in core 3 ?
> > > 
> > > 	I was using it not so long ago and it was working fine.
> > > 
> > > > I've tried the gui configuration for tool gdm. The machine has no
> > > > firewall enabled - all I get the "gdm_child_action: Aborting display
> > > > jonspc:1" in the log ?
> > > 
> > > 	I'm suprised that's the only message you get - a glance at the code
> > > suggests if you're getting this error message (which is from the master)
> > > you should be getting another message from the slave.
> > If found my problem, its a name resolver issue (thank you Mr Cox :-D )
> > I think email is on a go-slow, please look back if you have time.
> > 
> > Some comments on this and a few other things
> > 
> > 1) gdm doesn't have a process itself, it runs from init - but when gdm
> > is started it seems to undergo a name change to "gdm-binary" without
> > being owned by gdm or anything called gdm. As a result its not possible
> > to cleanly restart gdm ? ie no "/etc/init.d/gdm restart". Am I missing
> > something here or this a bit naff ? 
> 
> 
> You can simply kill gdm by
> 
> pkill gdm-binary
> 
> (or your preferred method of killing processes). init should respawn gdm
> automatically.
> 
> /Peter

Yes, i'm well aware of how to do this - I was really just trying to
point out that its a bit crappy !

With xdm you edit the xdm support files and re-start xdm, this is not
possible with gdm. You have to find the *specific* "gdm-binary that
relates to the display and kill it, if you killall gdm-binary then then
you lose all sessions.

This is doubly crappy as prefdm started "gdm" - this vanished without
trace leaving an unknown number of gdm-binary behind. If I run A - I
expect to see "A" not lots of little "B", I know its legal and possible
- its just not friendly.

Jon




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]