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

Re: Running startx fails as a non-privileged user



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ron Johnson wrote:

|On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 03:15 -0700, Jeffrey Chimene wrote:
|
|>HI Folks,
|>
|>I've fallen prey to this same problem. See also
|>http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2005/01/msg00389.html
|>
|>I've setuid the XFree86 image. According to Ron Johnson, this fixed the
|>problem.
|>$ ls -lat /usr/bin/X11/XFree86
|>-rwsr-xr-x  1 root root 1745740 Dec 15 12:19 /usr/bin/X11/XFree86
|>
|>This doesn't seem to fix the problem on my box. I also have the
|>"correct" settings in XWrapper.config:
|
|
|What exactly did you do?  This?
|  #chmod 4755 /usr/bin/X11/XFree86

Right. Been there, done that. I also chmod a+w on /var/log just to be
fersure, fersure. Basically, it has something to do with .xsession
being superceded by .xinitrc. There were probably two problems. I
hadn't seen this since I haven't restarted X in > 14 days. The last
full reboot was  at least one month.

|>$ cat /etc/X11//Xwrapper.config
|># Xwrapper.config (Debian X Window System server wrapper
configuration file)
|><snip>
|>#   dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common
|>allowed_users=console
|>nice_value=-10
|
|
|Here are the values in mine:
|  allowed_users=console
|  nice_value=0
|
|nice_value is 0 because that's what it recommends for 2.6 kernels.

I'm still ru[i]ning 2.4. Something bad happens on 2.6 (my memory is
merciful w/r/t that upgrade)

|>I notice that the nice() call fails.
|>
|>If someone has other ideas, I'd really appreciate some help. I copied
|>over my .mozilla directory to /root to limp along for awhile, but I
|>really need to run as a NPU.

Basically, I'm back on the air. I now have to recover from the 3AM
thrashing that upset the delicate balance of installed software.

|>
|>Thanks,
|>jec
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCCQgcn4RJwCm9Tc8RAp0QAJ428q3HTzmE9HSaoCjTUOYl8iBhjACePG11
HalsUg7zAOeFwzviKQWaUbQ=
=YWNF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: