[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> the reason i'm not using x-based screensavers is that i'm unwilling to
> disable the ctrl-alt-bs sequence used to stop the x server -- the
> sequence is too useful when i'm diagnosing problems. that leaves me
> w/ using things like vlock because the x-based screensavers appear to
> be pointless w/ the ctrl-alt-bs sequence enabled (has this changed?
> or is my understanding off?).
Anyone who has access to your console can probably get in if they're
sufficiently determined (think boot floppy). But I agree that there's
no reason to make it easy for them. What I do is start X with the
command "startx&exit". This means that even if someone *does* kill X
(or tries to suspend it), they'll still be faced with a login prompt,
rather than a nice shell prompt.
Your approach sounds reasonable too -- and to make it work the way you
described, I'd try reserving a VT, and using chvt+vlock in a script.
But I can't guarantee that'll work, so some testing might be in order.
:-)
I don't know of any way to trigger that off of an inactivity timeout
though...
cheers
--
Chris Waters, Systems Engineer, Critical Path, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
