Re: [Utopia] gnome-vfs patch, take one

[Michael Banck <mbanck debian org>]

On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 07:48:15AM +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-05-13 at 21:03 +0200, David Zeuthen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-05-13 at 20:41 +0200, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> > > I'm always wondering how gvm is going to work out, when your various people
> > > are simultaneously logged into one machine and all running gvm. Using
> > > X-terminals for example. Multiple gvm's racing for a hotplugged volume, volumes
> > > being unmounted when one of the users logs out.. But i don't know if that
> > > really falls into gvm's scope... 
> 
> > The easy answer is that only the g-v-m instance(s) for the user at the
> > console will have sufficient privileges to mount
> 
> Remember that some distributions (i.e. Debian) don't have the concept of
> "at the console" and use groups and permissions to access devices.

This is not considered to be a feature, though. There have been long
discussions between various people on how to best solve this. The issue
has been pushed to the technical-committee a while ago, the following
post summarizes this rather well:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2004/03/msg00000.html

In that posting, Sam says Redhat uses pam_console for this. Does anybody
know whether that's true, whether it works well and how SuSE is doing
this? I guess having input from you guys would be valuable in order to
find a good solution for Debian that fits with the list motto.


cheers,

Michael

-- 
"Hey, that's so trivial I implemented it last weekend and forgot
I'd done so!  :-)"
                -- Roland McGrath