On Wed, 19.12.07 12:12, Neil Thompson (abraxis@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > Also, I'd argue even if it worked before (which it didn't) the > > behaviour exposed by PA+CK is the more correct one, from a security > > perspective. And hence speaking of a "regression" in this area is very > > adventurous. > > > > Something that used to work without issues, doesn't any more...looks like > a duck, walks like a duck... Sorry, but it *didn't* work before. By default the access mode of the dmix SHM is 0600. i.e. only a single user ID may access the sound card at a time. If you want to open up dmix to multiple users at the same time you need to change it to 0666 or so, which is a security hole and needs some non-trivial reconfiguration. The reconfiguration necessary to open up PA to other users is a lot simpler to do. Just copy a cookie file around. > And then the use case just gets dismissed. Paraphrasing..."the clueless newbie > who doesn't really use her machine will be OK, and the other folks will just have > to change the way they work". I didn't dismiss your use case at all. All I told you is that the kind of setup you envision required non-trivial reconfiguration before, and it requires reconfiguration now. So, calling this is a regression is bogus. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553 http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
