[PATCH xinit 1/2] startx: Fix startx picking an already used display number when -nolock is used

Ray Strode halfline at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 10:12:05 PDT 2015


On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Jasper St. Pierre
<jstpierre at mecheye.net> wrote:
> ... Why does displayfd imply nolock?
It doesn't really matter why it implies, nolock, I guess. The issue at
hand is that it
does (and always has) implied nolock.  You can't fix that without
breaking things that
rely on it being nolock (like mutter).

> I consider the .X0-lock files an API that we shouldn't break.
Boat's already sailed on this one.  X server already supports a number
of modes that
don't use lock files, and you can't change that without breaking
things in the wild.

Anyway, that aside, they are a bad idea. They create a trivial denial of service
opportunity for users with /tmp access but not local access, they
clutter up /tmp,
and the role they serve is already covered by the more modern
-displayfd construct.


More information about the xorg-devel mailing list