Re: logout trouble with GDM and LDAP+Krb5+AFS
By switching to another vt and running ps, I see just ssh-agent and
gamin still alive for logging-out user, but they quit soon and a
single X process remains running (owned by root).
Even alone, X does not exit by its own, I need ask it by
pressing CTRL-ALT-Backspace.
What's worked for me, it's configure GDM to start X server
with "-terminate" option.
It seems my PAM configuration is holding X in someway...
I guess its (X) default behavior shouldn' t be stay waiting
for nobody.
2005/5/9, Mark Roach <mrroach@okmaybe.com>:
> Marcio Scheibler wrote:
> > Hi List,
> >
> > I'm using Gdm for login, libnss-ldap for general user accounts,
> > libpam-krb5 for auth and libpam-openafs-session for getting
> > AFS tokens. For while home dirs are local, not AFS.
> >
> > "Networked" (LDAP/krb5) accounts works well.
> > GDM login gives me (through PAM) gives me kerberos
> > tickets and AFS token. After that I log out and get
> > GDM login screen just like it should be.
> >
> > However, if I log in using a classical local account (/etc/passwd entry,
> > no Kerberos principal), when I try to logout, gnome seems to
> > end session OK, but X Server just does not close and shows
> > its traditional appearance (gray-pixmapped background and
> > "X"-shapped mouse cursor) without any action available except mouse-cursor
> > moving. At same time, GDM complains that vt7 is being locked by that X
> > instance, and
> > ask me to start another X server at vt8.
>
> Seems like a strange problem. What I would check is whether there are
> processes that are not dying which are preventing X from shutting down.
> If you recreate the problem, then ctrl+alt+f1 and log in as root, do a
> "ps aux | grep <username>" to see what processes (if any) are still
> hanging out there.
>
> -Mark
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------
Marcio Scheibler
Reply to: