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 ? 2) If the reverse name doesn't resolve the only entry in the log with debugging off is : Jan 20 10:57:19 localhost gdm[7118]: gdm_child_action: Aborting display jonspc:1 3) Speaking of logs, this is only a machine for "play" - so if its not been owned, and the following is normal, then the log should have something less pant wetting than this - something above or below explaining what process is doing this and/or why would be nice. Jan 20 07:01:01 localhost crond(pam_unix)[6836]: session opened for user root by (uid=0)Jan 20 07:01:01 localhost crond(pam_unix)[6836]: session closed for user root Jan 20 07:01:01 localhost crond(pam_unix)[6836]: session closed for user root Cheers, Jon
