I shall do that anyway - to ensure that my fc2 "thin" clients will work without reinstalling... (they once was fc1 thin clients) (the point of running a "normal" distro on them is to make it possible to plug'em in anywhere on the net without modifying the main DHCP server. Which is something i am not allowed to do (first thing i would do is to get a proper DHCPD and DNS - windows server 2000 dns sucks beyond anything. It cant even resolve all domain names... man, 04.10.2004 kl. 15.56 skrev Jeff Spaleta: > On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 15:35:41 +0200, Kyrre Ness Sjobak > <kyrre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > About the "console" flag: would a user sitting on an XDMCP terminal be > > considered a console user or not? How is it determined if he/she is a > > console user or not? Because someone sitting on an xdmcp terminal > > shouldn't be considered "console"... > > I strongly suggest you read over the system documentation on how > pam_console works and the associated configuration files in an effort > to understand how things are configured by default. My limited > understanding of the default situations is that remote xdmcp > connections are not considered 'console'. But don't take my word for > it, i haven't gotten around to testing xdmcp during fc3 testing yet. > If you are concerned I encourage you to test the remote xdmcp > connection case and make sure the defaults are not configured to set > the xdmcp user as console owner. Here's a hint the files in > /var/run/console/ are particularly useful to watch, to figure out who > is the current 'console' user. > > -jef
