Session Management Proposal
ossi at kde.org
Sat Jan 3 19:58:33 EET 2004
On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 09:50:19AM -0800, George wrote:
> I think the gdm protocol is semi decent in retrospect. There are several
> things though:
> 1) get rid of the authentication bullshit, start one main socket say:
> /tmp/.dm-sockets/main for the unauthenticated stuff and then
> per-display sockets like /tmp/.dm-sockets/:0 for the stuff that
> requires authentication (console authentication currently). That
> way this can be done with unix permissions rather then the cookie
as much as i'd like to agree with this ... i read in some man page, that
some systems simply ignore file permissions on socket nodes. depending
on which systems are affected, we or those systems are screwed ...
> 2) There should be a way to query available 'commands' so that a client
> can see what the DM can and can't do, and this will allow gdm and kdm
> specific commands. Or dm-specific extended commands.
yeah, just like imap does, i think: the initial greeting identifies the
manager incl. (protocol) version and lists supported capabilities. an
explicit capability command would be possible as well, but i'm not sure
we need that.
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.
More information about the xdg