[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: anyone knowledgeable enough pls help!




On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Ron Rademaker wrote:

> For the starting of x-windows, I guess you could but startx in .login in
> the users home-dir.
> The netscape part it quite a bit more difficult ( I guess you can start it
> using .Xsession or something, but you'll have to check the docs of that
> for more info), the closing part, here the idea I got on that ( I can't
> provide it to you because I'm not good at c):
> 
> Create a c-program that starts netscape and include signal.h that
> intercepts the SIGTERM, when the SIGTERM arrives the user is prompted for
> a password (netscape will be closed at that moment), if the
> password is correct, the program is terminated and netscape isn't running
> anymore, if the password is incorrect, netscape is restarted. 
> 
> Perhaps this can be of any help.
> 
> Ron Rademaker
>

This here is absolutely wrong. The X11 system uses its own signals,
transported via TCP/IP. Clicking File->Quit is just like clicking any
other button. Netscape is responsible for handling the event, and it has
no reason to kill its parent if run by a system()-like function, or run by
exec*() function it will have its own signal-handling table. I have
written two small programmes (one for GTK, and one to call it and trap
signals). I can send them if you wish.

> 
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Joseph de los Santos wrote:
> 
> > I'm going out of my mind....
> > 
> > when a user logs in a terminal this is what will happen:
> >  -automatically starts x-window, all keybindings and or hotkeys will be
> > disabled, run netscape and it can't be closed without asking for the user's
> > password. Can a script be used for this? and anyone kind enough to show me?
> > Also, Maybe this can be done by adding/modifying xmodmap in the user's
> > .xinitrc? if so, how? any help with be greatly appreciated.
> > 
> > btw, what's the difference between keycodes and keysyms?
> > 
> > Thanks in advance :)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 




Reply to: