home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
- Path: sparky!uunet!walter!porthos!donner!bucci1
- From: bucci1@donner.uucp (25853-pastor)
- Subject: Re: faking xlock with kill -STOP <X server PID>
- Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 20:33:18 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Jul22.203318.24969@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>
- Summary: What do you mean by X server PID?
- References: <1992Jul21.143641.20596@Arco.COM>
- Sender: netnews@porthos.cc.bellcore.com (USENET System Software)
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <1992Jul21.143641.20596@Arco.COM>, cgp@Arco.COM (Chris Phillips (214) 754-6419) writes:
- > Unfortunately xlock doesn't just sleep; it does hinder the
- > execution of other processes. But if the X server is
- > SIGSTOPped, won't this have the same effect? The only drawback
- > I see is that you will need to login somewhere else and send it
- > a SIGCONT.
- >
- > Of course, keystrokes are not ignored and you should do something
- > like
- > $ sleep 5; kill -STOP <X server PID>
- >
- > Then move the pointer to the root window.
- > Are there any security problems with this?
- >
- > Chris
-
- We were wondering exactly what you meant by "X server PID". When we
- used the PID for the window manager, the applications still ran, but all
- input was locked out. If we stopped the original ksh, the window manager
- still allowed the user to close the window of the original xterm (and thus
- terminate that display completely).
-
- What we are looking for is a way to either hide that xterm icon, or to disable
- the close ability on it, but still allow users to work with the other
- applications with the touch screen.
-
- Thanks
-
- Robert Buccigrossi (bucci1@donner.cc.bellcore.com)
-