Hi, * Nico Golde <n...@ngolde.de> [2010-01-18 20:03]: > * Premysl Hruby <dfe...@gmail.com> [2010-01-17 16:53]: > > On (17/01/10 16:24), Gregor Best wrote: > > > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:24:11 +0100 > > > From: Gregor Best <g...@ring0.de> > > > To: dev@suckless.org > > > Subject: Re: [dev] [SLOCK] is not safe > > > List-Id: dev mail list <dev.suckless.org> > > > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 04:17:16PM +0100, Julien Pecqueur wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I'm using slock and i am suprised to realize that is not safe at all! > > > > > > > > I launched slock in my DWM session. I just have to press CTRL+ALT+F1 > > > > and press CTRL+z (to send startx in background an get the hand on the > > > > shell) and type "killall slock" to unlock the session... > > > > > > Same thing with every other screen locker. The only "solution" is to > > > remove the ChangeVT* mappings from the xmodmap. > > > > > > > Not really, simply using 'startx & exit' instead of plain 'startx' is > > sufficient. > > This thread is hilarious, I find it pretty funny that on a mailing list of > the > suckless project people are suggesting all kinds of weird things to solve > this > instead just using exec /usr/bin/dwm in ~/.xinitrc rather than /usr/bin/dwm. > Seriously, WTF?!
errm not exec dwm but startx, yeah sorry...
here is what i use actually in my zshrc:
if [ "$(tty)" = "/dev/tty1" ]; then
exec startx
fi
Cheers
Nico
--
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - n...@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0xA0A0AAAA
For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.
pgpDLaGPFjgW2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
