Re: user not authorized to run X, strange variant
On 12/12/2000 at 11:35 -0800, Erik Steffl wrote:
> my point was that these options do not help in what I think is by far
> most common situation. then again, I have no lies neither statistics to
> support this:-)
> I mean the most common situations should be solved first, then special
> cases. maybe I'm missing something but I can't find any docs on this...
I think the most _appropriate_ approach is to make things secure above all.
That must be why X comes rootonly by default until someone changes it. Nice.
gpg fingerprint: F20B 12A8 A8F6 FD1F 9B1D BA62 C424 8E73 DD2E 47C8