| Summary: | Fedora 8 has become naggy. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Joseph A. Farmer <jfarmer99> |
| Component: | xorg-x11 | Assignee: | X/OpenGL Maintenance List <xgl-maint> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 8 | CC: | mcepl |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2008-01-30 16:54:35 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | ||
|
Description
Joseph A. Farmer
2008-01-30 00:31:41 UTC
This is very rare nagging for really highly questionable operation. There is a long line of reasons why using Xorg as a root is really bad idea (breaking ConsoleKit and PolicyKit is just one of them), and it should be said to any user trying to do it, that it is such. I believe that we are not nagging anybody without a really good reason, and it is one of those rare cases. Closing as NOTABUG It's not a "really highly questionable operation." Not everyone cares about ConsoleKit and PolicyKit. Got that? I own the computer. There is never any reason to nag a person more than once. Add a check-box to disable it after the first time. Is this Redhat adding this or does X do it? I'd be interested in which package I'll need to recompile after I tear that out. Well, if you have Fedora, you have your system full of ConsoleKit and PolicyKit, whether you like it or not. And if you are able to get rid of them, getting rid of this dialog should be piece of cake for you. So, yes you are right -- it was closed in mistake. This should not be NOTABUG, but WONTFIX. WONTFIX would be more accurate as it's upstream. I'll file a bug with them.
<yoursnide>And if you are able to get rid of them, getting rid
of this dialog should be piece of cake for you.</yoursnide>
You've lost sight of what I'm after my little friend. I want that dialog gone:
gsm_check_for_root (void)
{
// simple fix no?
return ROOTSESSION_RESPONSE_CONTINUE;
// everything after here is just noise.
/*
GtkWidget *dlg;
gint response;
if (geteuid () != 0)
return FALSE;
dlg = gtk_message_dialog_new (NULL, GTK_DIALOG_MODAL, GTK_MESSAGE_WARNING,
GTK_BUTTONS_NONE,
_("This session is running as a privileged user"));
gtk_message_dialog_format_secondary_text (GTK_MESSAGE_DIALOG (dlg),
_("Running a session as a privileged
user should be avoided for security reasons. If possible, you should log in as a
normal user."));
gtk_dialog_add_buttons (GTK_DIALOG (dlg),
_("_Continue"), ROOTSESSION_RESPONSE_CONTINUE,
GTK_STOCK_QUIT, ROOTSESSION_RESPONSE_QUIT,
NULL);
gtk_dialog_set_default_response (GTK_DIALOG (dlg),
ROOTSESSION_RESPONSE_QUIT);
gtk_window_set_title (GTK_WINDOW (dlg), "");
gtk_window_set_position (GTK_WINDOW (dlg), GTK_WIN_POS_CENTER);
response = gtk_dialog_run (GTK_DIALOG (dlg));
gtk_widget_destroy (dlg);
return !(response == ROOTSESSION_RESPONSE_CONTINUE);
*/
}
(In reply to comment #4) > You've lost sight of what I'm after my little friend. > I want that dialog gone: I totally understand what you are after -- I didn't want to be nasty to you, just to tell, that this won't change in the Fedora packages, so if you want to have it removed against our advice, then you have to make your patch and maintain it throughout the development of the subsequent releases of Fedora. Apparently I was right, and this is not a big deal for you. But there is really no point in maintaining this conversation; as they say it can serve no purpose. |