> Then, here's another silly question. When you copied the key, did you
> copy the whole thing including the === BEGIN === and === END=== lines?
>
I think an error in the key would cause an authentication error instead
of what he is seeing (but you might break it deliberately to be sure).
I had not copied the ===BEGIN=== and end lines, but I had also not copied them from the client key on the CentOS 4.4 box (which worked anyway), and authentication worked on centos 5
but nonetheless I just tried copy-pasting those lines too (== the whole file contents) from CentOS 5 into the mac client, and get the exact same (lack of) behavior.
and just for completeness, I copied the client dsa key file from the server (using sftp rather than copy paste from a terminal window into the nxclient key window) and then used the import button in the nxclient key window. same thing, authenticates but no hint of a desktop
there is a well known (and mildly annoying) end-of-line character difference between mac and unix, which could potentially come into play. but its a trivial conversion (s /\r/\n/g), and the awesome folks at nomachine have got to know all about it when building an nxclient for mac. and if there was something amiss here, the same copy-paste from CentOS 4.4 would give me the same issue
and yes, deliberately breaking it works just fine :-) , meaning no authentication. I deleted the final '=' from the DSA key (from the key part, not the ===END===, which for me is more like -----END-----) and tried connecting, and it would not authenticate, saying the DSA key was corrupt or had had a passphrase attached to it. when I paste that back in, I get authenticated but no desktop. I also tried deleting a '-' from the ----END---- line, and it fails to authenticate
Is gnome starting normally at the console or could there be some problem
at that level?
yes, at the console its doing lots of lovely gnome-like things, and fires up over vnc
I've forgotten if you need to be in runlevel 5 for
freenx like you do for remote xdm logins, but that's another possibility.
nice idea, but I've been at run level 5 all along. and just verified this with "who -r" (I don't know enough to mess with other run levels). and Akemi says run level 3 is fine
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
