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
> 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.