Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 9:33 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Does this mean you should always use Xnest, NX client, vnc, ssh, etc,
instead of VTs to get login sessions that don't accidentally grab
unrelated hardware ownership? That seems backwards if what you really
want is an audio player as a server that isn't tied to a particular
login session.
As we get more familiar with making HAL/CK policy edits, these sorts
of questions will lose meaning. HAL/CK policies can and will be
customized away from the default set of rules written with a shared
desktop in mind. There's no technical reason that a music server
daemon package for example couldn't drop in new policy that changed
the behavior here. We just have to understand how to write that
policy file and then agree that's the sort of thing we want server
packages to do on install.
I'm not convinced that anyone can deduce the behavior I want from the
packages that are installed. Or even that I'd know for sure myself
ahead of time in all cases but I have a hard time imagining a case where
I'd want access cut off to an existing, running session just because
someone else might want to check their email on a different account and
they do it from a VT instead of Xnest. Is it possible to make the rules
easy to manage locally - and can you have a first-served wins rule?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
