Stefan Cornelius wrote:

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Christopher L Tubbs II ctubbsii@emich.edu wrote:

...

What does everybody think of the new greeter?

I never noticed your first 2 points, but I sure share your opinion when it comes down to points 3-5. Never cared enough to put it in words and complain somewhere (since this is personal preference stuff and not really a bug), but I disliked the new GDM, too.

My 2cent "me too" post :)

Kind Regards, Stefan

Well, the first 2 points are definitely bugs (the first is fixed already in a patch, as I said), but I would consider the lack of ability to configure the greeter a serious oversight, if not a flat out bug. You're right that the ugliness and the animation are preference stuff, but personally, I think the delay due to the animation is serious enough to be considered a bug, if only in the designer's brain.

Rainman

Michael Schwendt wrote:

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:17:35 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

Stefan Cornelius wrote:

...

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Christopher L Tubbs II ctubbsii@emich.edu wrote:

...

What does everybody think of the new greeter?

I never noticed your first 2 points, but I sure share your opinion when it comes down to points 3-5. Never cared enough to put it in words and complain somewhere (since this is personal preference stuff and not really a bug), but I disliked the new GDM, too.

My 2cent "me too" post :)

Kind Regards, Stefan

Well, the first 2 points are definitely bugs (the first is fixed already in a patch, as I said), but I would consider the lack of ability to configure the greeter a serious oversight, if not a flat out bug. You're right that the ugliness and the animation are preference stuff, but personally, I think the delay due to the animation is serious enough to be considered a bug, if only in the designer's brain.

"Animation"? What is it really? An attempt at making it look slow and poor on every machine? After entering a username, the dialog size shrinks in several visible steps while flickering badly. If that is by design, my first thought would be that the desiger can't be serious about it.

I see it as a clear attempt to design a login greeter that 'behaves' similarly to the OS X Leopard greeter, which is great except for the fact that OS X is running in 3D at that point and the resize is probably done by much more complicated method than several individual resizing stages.

The animation can probably be made smoother in the future, especially if you're not logging in while some services are still doing work after just starting up in the background. I agree its not very glamorous right now, but its a damn-sight better than just suddenly snapping to a smaller box size... even DOS could have done that.

Michael Schwendt wrote:

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:27:55 -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:

...

The animation can probably be made smoother in the future, especially if you're not logging in while some services are still doing work after just starting up in the background. I agree its not very glamorous right now, but its a damn-sight better than just suddenly snapping to a smaller box size...

Why?

Because that is static, boring, and stoic... all of which is not dynamic, modern, alive, and active. It may be slower, but I like it, even with its clunkyness, and I think alot of other people will too. When I'm desperate to login fast I use a VT.

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:42:55 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

Andrew Farris wrote:

...

Michael Schwendt wrote:

...

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:27:55 -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:

...

The animation can probably be made smoother in the future, especially if you're not logging in while some services are still doing work after just starting up in the background. I agree its not very glamorous right now, but its a damn-sight better than just suddenly snapping to a smaller box size...

Why?

Because that is static, boring, and stoic... all of which is not dynamic, modern, alive, and active. It may be slower, but I like it, even with its clunkyness, and I think alot of other people will too. When I'm desperate to login fast I use a VT.

Oh, it definitely has it's appeal... particularly with giving new users a good first impression that Fedora can do neat stuff,

The first impression is a strong flicker effect that makes the user think "wtf can't the dialog reduce its size smoothly and without flickering?" The second thought is a flicker of hope (pun intended) that it's just the ugly dialog and not due to a fundamental accelleration problem somewhere in the graphics driver.

but for a lot of us, we just want to log in quickly. That's why I'd want it in a config utility.

[X] Flicker-free login dialog

;)

Michael Schwendt wrote:

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:42:55 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote: [X] Flicker-free login dialog

Perhaps you meant:

[ ] make dialog flicker during login

, defaults to off ;-}

Even less cool during a vnc login, and on my hp omnibook 4150 [686-366 MHz]

"Animation"? What is it really? An attempt at making it look slow and poor on every machine? After entering a username, the dialog size shrinks in several visible steps while flickering badly. If that is by design, my first thought would be that the desiger can't be serious about it.

I thought that was just because i was running in VMWare..

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Matthias Clasen wrote: ...

...

4. Where the hell are the login screen settings? This is a serious

oversight. I had thought the greeter configuration was supposed to be EASIER than previous releases (I can't remember where I read that, but for some reason I was expecting it).

What specific settings do you need ? The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail, which is not something we want to go back to.

I want to be prompted for a username instead of having a list of them appear to choose from. How do I change this?

thanks, - --Guy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:58 -0500, Guy Streeter wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Matthias Clasen wrote: ...

...

...

4. Where the hell are the login screen settings? This is a serious

oversight. I had thought the greeter configuration was supposed to be EASIER than previous releases (I can't remember where I read that, but for some reason I was expecting it).

What specific settings do you need ? The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail, which is not something we want to go back to.

I want to be prompted for a username instead of having a list of them appear to choose from. How do I change this?

You can just type your name in the list anyway. It'll work.

I want to *not* have a list of names shown to choose from.

thanks, - --Guy

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:20:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail,

Apparently those "arcane details" are making older gdm versions usable in situations other than a default. So far I have an impression that as far as arcane goes gdm-2.22 configuration beats everything in sight handily. Add to that "inflexible" and "mysterious" and we start to close to a reasonable description.

In particular on http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration one can find: "The GDM Greeter uses some of the same framework that your desktop session will use. And so, it is influenced by a number of the same GConf settings". On a machine with mulitple users and desktop sessions configured in various ways with different GConf settings what this mythical "your desktop" is supposed to be and what that "the same" may mean?

Michal

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:54:35PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:06 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:

...

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:20:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail,

Apparently those "arcane details" are making older gdm versions usable in situations other than a default. So far I have an impression that as far as arcane goes gdm-2.22 configuration beats everything in sight handily. Add to that "inflexible" and "mysterious" and we start to close to a reasonable description.

You didn't answer my very concrete question.

You can start with responding to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=374091#c3, which was closed as RAWHIDE and without any hints what to do with issues raised there, and follow up with explanations to serious questions from the message you are responding here you cut off so conveniently.

Here is the next one - how to kill a display of a list of logins? More can follow but let's start small.

I tried a few times to make some head-or-tail from a configuration of gdm-2.22 with a hope that with time some tools and/or better explantions will show up. So far it beat me on every occasion. Well, it is not the only game in town.

Michal

Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:42 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

What does everybody think of the new greeter?

Personally, I have issues with it:

1. suspend option remains, even after disabling suspend globally via

gconf-editor (bug already reported, and apparently patch has already been committed upstream)

In the meantime, you already can make the suspend button go away (together with the restart and shutdown buttons). See disable_restart_buttons on http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration

That's not useful. I want the shutdown and restart buttons... I just don't want a suspend button (since suspend is very unstable... at least I've never had good luck with it on my laptops).

...

2. I can't seem to configure my "face" image. Putting a ".face" graphic

in my home directory doesn't work, nor does configuring image with System->Preferences->Personal->About Me.

What permissions do you have on your home directory ?

The default, created by system-config-users: drwx------ And, .face has: -rw-r--r--

This might not be correct for use with gdm, but at the very least, configuring with "About Me" utility should just work by default by setting the right permissions or prompting if permissions are not correct?

...

4. Where the hell are the login screen settings? This is a serious

oversight. I had thought the greeter configuration was supposed to be EASIER than previous releases (I can't remember where I read that, but for some reason I was expecting it).

What specific settings do you need ? The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail, which is not something we want to go back to.

1. For one, it would be nice to disable faces. Sometimes it's okay, and sometimes it's just annoying.

2. It would also be nice to be able to choose how usernames are selected to appear in the list (even Windows can do this with TweakUI), whether by UID range (i.e. > 500 or whatever), or specified list. (A good configuration utility might have two columns, one column of available names and one column of selected names, with arrows between to add remove available names to/from selected names for listing).

3. The animation speed between clicking on username, and typing in password should be configurable (down to zero, so there is no delay). The login screen is for logging in, not for show, and the animation may be okay for some people, but most of us just want to login, and that means typing password immediately without waiting for animation.

4. There should be an option to display or not display date/time, accessibility options, session options, and to configure the list of available sessions.

5. How about configuring the background or theme? with preview?

6. A good greeter config utility would also make available the gconf settings that affect the greeter.

These are just a few ideas off the top of my head, since you asked :)

Rainman

Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 16:27 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

...

...

2. I can't seem to configure my "face" image. Putting a ".face" graphic

in my home directory doesn't work, nor does configuring image with System->Preferences->Personal->About Me.

What permissions do you have on your home directory ?

The default, created by system-config-users: drwx------ And, .face has: -rw-r--r--

This might not be correct for use with gdm, but at the very least, configuring with "About Me" utility should just work by default by setting the right permissions or prompting if permissions are not correct?

Possibly. Although the 'bad surprise' factor is pretty big if some random capplet starts messing with your home direcory. It might be better to store the faces somewhere else.

I think storing faces elsewhere is a good idea...

Perhaps the simplest idea, though, is to have gnome-about-me ask the user if they'd like to modify home directory permissions to show face on desktop, so at least, there's no surprises.

...

1. For one, it would be nice to disable faces. Sometimes it's okay, and

sometimes it's just annoying.

2. It would also be nice to be able to choose how usernames are selected

to appear in the list (even Windows can do this with TweakUI), whether by UID range (i.e. > 500 or whatever), or specified list. (A good configuration utility might have two columns, one column of available names and one column of selected names, with arrows between to add remove available names to/from selected names for listing).

The idea with the user list is to populate it dynamically with only the users which have logged in before. As a compromise for existing systems, we have made it show all local users, which is what brings your test users into the list. Maybe we need a way to mark users as don't-show-in-user-list.

The idea is good. In fact, showing all local users (UID>500) is a good idea for a default list, but it definitely needs a way for an administrator to configure the exception of UID's from the list. Perhaps an /etc/greeter-users file with a slight modification to system-config-users to have a checkbox to "show user in login screen" (maybe a firstboot modification for users at install time also). Alternatively, a system group named "greeter-users". Only members of this group will show up in the list.

...

3. The animation speed between clicking on username, and typing in

password should be configurable (down to zero, so there is no delay). The login screen is for logging in, not for show, and the animation may be okay for some people, but most of us just want to login, and that means typing password immediately without waiting for animation.

Here's a trick:

cat "gtk-enable-animations=0" > /var/lib/gdm/.gtkrc-2.0

turns off the animation.

I assume you meant: echo "gtk-enable-animations=0" >> /var/lib/gdm/.gtkrc-2.0

Thanks, that's good to know! (This might need to be documented somewhere in release notes?) Of course, I'd still prefer a utility to configure it, but for now, I'll do this. (It works btw).

...

4. There should be an option to display or not display date/time,

accessibility options, session options, and to configure the list of available sessions.

I don't think there is a big chance that we're going to add a ton of hide-or-show-this-or-that-ui-element knobs. One central idea with the simple greeter was to make it adapt instead of adding such knobs.

Yeah, I figured as much. As an administrator, though, it's nice to have such "knobs" available. Clicking a checkbox is a lot simpler than replacing the greeter with a custom one, for most admins. I have a feeling I'm not the only one who wouldn't mind such a simple feature in future versions.

[snip]

On the flip side, the new gdm should hopefully make it easier to write alternative greeters, so that we don't have to shoehorn every possible login scenario into a single greeter. One example to keep an eye on is http://macslow.thepimp.net/?p=163

I agree that the greeter should be minimal and should not attempt to address every possible scenario, but a few minimal tweaks are useful, and are noticeably absent (particularly excepting usernames from the list).

...

5. How about configuring the background or theme? with preview?

Yes, configuring the background will be possible, it just didn't happen in time for F9. I implemented this last weekend, actually.

Cool. As somebody else mentioned, the greeter didn't quite fit the F9 theme. Having this will be an improvement.

Rainman

Rodd Clarkson wrote: [snip]

...

Perhaps the simplest idea, though, is to have gnome-about-me ask the user if they'd like to modify home directory permissions to show face on desktop, so at least, there's no surprises.

I'm just curious. Where would you store them (other than the home directory) that would remain during updates.

Well, the images are already stored in the pixmaps directory, so you just need to store the path (if another path is specified that the greeter doesn't have permissions for, that's up to the user to make sure the permissions are correct). The path could be stored in an /etc/passwd type file (/etc/faces?), with a similar utility to allow each user to modify his/her own line (gnome-about-me could be modified to do it, but I'm not sure what this would involve).

An alternative approach that would not allow users to modify their own image is to make the utility that edits the /etc/faces file be system-config-users. If that was the case, the utility could also have a checkbox "include in greeter list", along with input box for image path.

Personally, I think the decision to have a username in the list is an administrator one, and the decision for the image is a user one.

Rainman

On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 14:09 +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 11:25 -0400, Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

Rodd Clarkson wrote: [snip]

...

Personally, I think the decision to have a username in the list is an administrator one, and the decision for the image is a user one.

ACK.

But when I (like many) upgrade from one version of fedora to the next, the /home partition is the only thing that is preserved.

Well, you will want to preserve more, such as /var/ftp, /var/www, /srv and a lot of other stuff below /etc and /var.

The rest of the file system is replaced with a new one (often including a format). So /etc isn't going to still contain this images.

I suspect most users (and sysadmins, don't want to have to replace the images each time the upgrade and having them in /home is a good place to preserve them across installs.

/home is a bad place for networked environments, which have /home/<user> distributed across a network, because fetching such images would trigger a lot of traffic (consider conditionally auto-mounted user-homes).

Ralf

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:20, Matthias Clasen wrote:

In the meantime, you already can make the suspend button go away (together with the restart and shutdown buttons). See disable_restart_buttons on http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration

Yea! Since I have yet to find a desktop machine that would actually suspend or hibernate with any version of Linux I have ran on it.

What specific settings do you need ? The old gdmsetup exposed every arcane configuration detail, which is not something we want to go back to.

In other words, if you aren't a single user or very small LAN then use another display manager.

I'm not doing anything that crazy but I do want to be able to customize the login box. I twiddle the background. I add things to the welcome banner. I MUST be able to get the frickin' faces and list of users out and replace it with a normal username prompt. (12K entries in /home mounted via NFS. You do the frickin' math on that.) What I'm hearing is that I'll be SOL and had better be evaluating other display managers.

Now I'm not afraid to edit a config file, I actually prefer it, but it's gone and XML is at best read only for humans. It's a package deal guys, if you go the XML route you MUST provide a tool to manipulate it.

I really hate this notion that until every last option is removed that GNOME just isn't finished. If I wanted a Mac I know where the Apple Store is.

Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 18:35 -0500, John Morris wrote:

...

I'm not doing anything that crazy but I do want to be able to customize the login box. I twiddle the background. I add things to the welcome banner. I MUST be able to get the frickin' faces and list of users out and replace it with a normal username prompt. (12K entries in /home mounted via NFS. You do the frickin' math on that.) What I'm hearing is that I'll be SOL and had better be evaluating other display managers.

You have not actually tried it, have you ? Your 10000 network users are not going to show up in the user list, since we only populate the list with local users.

Doesn't matter where the users are, it matters where the home directories are... if /home is automounted, the problem still exists. I've seen setups like this, where the admin didn't want to deal with security issues caused by NIS, so he just duplicated usernames as local users on all systems and made the home directories automounted.

Imagine automounting via NFS each of 10k home directories just to read a .face file from each. That's quite a load on the network. I'm sure GDM isn't aware of the fact that the home directories aren't local, since autofs does this transparently.

...

Now I'm not afraid to edit a config file, I actually prefer it, but it's gone and XML is at best read only for humans. It's a package deal guys, if you go the XML route you MUST provide a tool to manipulate it.

Not sure which xml file you are talking about. Last time I checked, /etc/gdm/custom.conf had the same format as always...

I think he's just pointing out that there IS a need to configure GDM, and you should provide a human-readable config file for it, or otherwise (if XML, especially) a utility to configure it.

Rainman

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 19:47 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

You have not actually tried it, have you ? Your 10000 network users are not going to show up in the user list, since we only populate the list with local users.

How are you distinguishing local users from any other kind?

-sv

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:22 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:16 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 19:47 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

You have not actually tried it, have you ? Your 10000 network users are not going to show up in the user list, since we only populate the list with local users.

How are you distinguishing local users from any other kind?

Local users are the ones you get by reading /etc/passwd.

So, you've got a separate reader of /etc/passwd independent of the normal glibc lookup for users in gdm?

-sv

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:34 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

No need; glibc offers fgetpwent.

okay, that's reasonable. Though doesn't this mean that an environment of mixed remote and local users will only show local users and give the impression to the remote user that s/he is not allowed to login?

-sv

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 23:48, Matthias Clasen wrote:

No, the remote user will get the impression that he has to click "Other" the first time he logs in. Next time, gdm knows him and he will show up in the user list.

That is still bogus. We have a few hundred active (defined as used the system in the last thirty days) users. There really needs to be an easy, documented, way to kill off the face browser once and for all.

The face browser would suffer from the following defects in our situation:

1. With thirty public workstations patrons would appear on some and not others, leading many to the conclusion they need to continue to login on the first machine they used. Recipe for total CHAOS.

2. It is bad enough that a knowledgeable user can get data (ypcat for example) on other users, putting it right up on the login screen, even without doing something as insane as posting actual photos, is just asking for someone to ask us how that can possibly comply with state laws regarding the privacy of library patron information.

On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 11:13:13PM -0500, John Morris wrote:

2. It is bad enough that a knowledgeable user can get data (ypcat for

example) on other users, putting it right up on the login screen, even without doing something as insane as posting actual photos, is just asking for someone to ask us how that can possibly comply with state laws regarding the privacy of library patron information.

Certainly it would be iffy in a public location in the EU as well and in some environments would prevent deployment in that form.

I've always just used gdmsetup to fix it: Pick a style without face browser

Chris Ricker wrote:

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Alan Cox wrote:

...

Certainly it would be iffy in a public location in the EU as well and in some environments would prevent deployment in that form.

I've always just used gdmsetup to fix it: Pick a style without face browser

That's what everyone's complaining about -- gdm 2.22 shipping in F9 lacks the gdmsetup functionality of 2.20 and older releases...

Then everyone should read this:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NewGdm?highlight=(gdm)%7C(greeter)

and this:

http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration

and stop complaining. ;-)

Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

David Boles wrote:

...

Chris Ricker wrote:

...

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Alan Cox wrote:

...

Certainly it would be iffy in a public location in the EU as well and in some environments would prevent deployment in that form.

I've always just used gdmsetup to fix it: Pick a style without face browser

That's what everyone's complaining about -- gdm 2.22 shipping in F9 lacks the gdmsetup functionality of 2.20 and older releases...

Then everyone should read this:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NewGdm?highlight=(gdm)%7C(greeter)

and this:

http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration

and stop complaining. ;-)

The link on fedoraproject.org that you gave states "gdmsetup got replaced by a yet-to-be-written new configuration tool"

Most of our suggestions/complaints will likely be addressed by that tool, but until it's actually written and delivered, we'll probably continue to complain... :)

Welcome to Rawhide. ;-)

Read my links a little more closely. Especially the second one which came from the first one. You can edit with a text editor untill the GUI is ready.

Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

David Boles wrote:

...

Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

David Boles wrote:

...

Chris Ricker wrote:

...

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Alan Cox wrote:

...

Certainly it would be iffy in a public location in the EU as well and in some environments would prevent deployment in that form.

I've always just used gdmsetup to fix it: Pick a style without face browser

That's what everyone's complaining about -- gdm 2.22 shipping in F9 lacks the gdmsetup functionality of 2.20 and older releases...

Then everyone should read this:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NewGdm?highlight=(gdm)%7C(greeter)

and this:

http://live.gnome.org/GDM/2.22/Configuration

and stop complaining. ;-)

The link on fedoraproject.org that you gave states "gdmsetup got replaced by a yet-to-be-written new configuration tool"

Most of our suggestions/complaints will likely be addressed by that tool, but until it's actually written and delivered, we'll probably continue to complain... :)

Welcome to Rawhide. ;-)

Read my links a little more closely. Especially the second one which came from the first one. You can edit with a text editor untill the GUI is ready.

Actually, I did read both links, but the biggest complaint so far seems to be the inability to disable the "smarter way of displaying user names" entirely, and the faces, which don't appear to be configuration options via a GUI or otherwise...

By the time a GUI is written, that should probably have changed...

Work in progress is always interesting. As I said, and as did the link(s) there is yet to be a GUI.

From what I read 'they' are working on this and this.

A real 'tester', gee I dislike that name, would live with the short comings of Rawhide and deal with the problems. If you really need a GUI to setup your system, actually *if* can only use a GUI to setup your system, you should not really be using Rawhide. Rawhide is often broken for some reason or another. It is not for the faint of heart.

Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

David Boles wrote: [snip]

...

A real 'tester', gee I dislike that name, would live with the short comings of Rawhide and deal with the problems. If you really need a GUI to setup your system, actually *if* can only use a GUI to setup your system, you should not really be using Rawhide. Rawhide is often broken for some reason or another. It is not for the faint of heart.

I'm not testing rawhide... I'm testing F9. Sure, right now, that's the same thing, of course, but it's still an important distinction, because rawhide is going to be an official release soon, and it should be ready. The differences is basically that "testing rawhide" implies making sure packages work as intended, whereas "testing F9" implies making sure packages are ready to be released. (Am I wrong?) Regardless, no tester should "live with short comings": a testers job is to point out bugs and feature short comings.

I agree. However the 'problem' you have with GDM is not a Fedora problem but a GNOME 'problem'. This is a Fedora list not a GNOME list. And it is a known issue. A solution for this 'problem' is under development. If you are really serious maybe you could help write some code for them? If not I would suggest that you write a bugzilla report on the GNOME bugzilla.

The comment on the "need" to use a GUI is completely irrelevant: a tester's job is to point out short comings in an aspect of the system, regardless of that tester's ability to use CLI or GUI, or their preference for either. In this particular case, it's even more irrelevant, though, because as we've consistently pointed out, there is currently NO way to configure gdm login to disable the user list or faces, or to customize the user list, by GUI or CLI tool, AFAIK, and nobody has posted anything here saying otherwise, since I started this thread.

Once again. Probably the wrong list. And again GMONE bugzilla. I bet most of you use KDE? So why not try KDM? Or try KDM even if you don't use KDE for your desktop?

Michal Jaegermann wrote:

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 04:15:40PM -0400, David Boles wrote:

...

Christopher L Tubbs II wrote:

...

I'm not testing rawhide... I'm testing F9. Sure, right now, that's the same thing, of course, but it's still an important distinction, because rawhide is going to be an official release soon, and it should be ready.

I agree. However the 'problem' you have with GDM is not a Fedora problem but a GNOME 'problem'.

Nothing really forced Fedora to stick into a release something which is clearly not yet done. No problems with something like that in rawhide but one should pay attention to testers.

Then you should bitch and complain all day and all night. ;-) Of course it is all for nothing now but maybe it will make you feel better. ;-)

As I recall, and I could be wrong, this is a complete rewrite. And it is part of the current 'new' GNOME. And the 'old one' would not work well or at all.

All of this was announced and discussed and no one on the development list objected.

Linux is a moving target. I can not think of anything that is ever truly 'done' now or when released. When software, by your description, is truly 'done' it is usually dropped because it is no longer being supported and/or worked on any longer.

As for GDM? What you see is what you will get. Fedora 9 is scheduled for next week and there is already somewhat of an expected slowdown in Rawhide.

As for me? I don't have a problem with GDM myself. Since there is only me here I missed the autologin feature. The link(s) that I posted before show you how to do that now. The new way. I found that information with a little effort and a little time. I dealt with it as it is.

I sorry that you are disappointed. It will all be fixed eventually. And, perhaps even then, you won't be happy. Time will tell. Good luck.

Michal Jaegermann wrote:

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 06:14:41PM -0400, David Boles wrote:

...

As I recall, and I could be wrong, this is a complete rewrite. And it is part of the current 'new' GNOME. And the 'old one' would not work well or at all.

Oh, really? Curiously enough it works pretty well for me. At this moment even gdm _binaries_ from F8 actually work.

I said that I could be wrong. It appears that I was. I did use the GDM from Fedora 8 on my Rawhide for a while. Only because i missed the autologin feature. Until I learned how to do it manually. If that does what you want and how you want it that is what you should use.

...

All of this was announced and discussed and no one on the development list objected.

Filing bug reports is not good enough? On this list I have seen quite a number of objections and no real answers. If testing list is going to be ignored then I do not see any real reasons not to shut it down.

I doubt that many of the developers have time to read anything posted here. Most is really vague to start out and then drifts off to fishing stories. ;-)

A bugzilla report goes directly to the right person. That was why I suggested it

As for "no real answers"? You got one. It is work in progress.

At the moment we are just generating traffic. You says it 'broken and wrong to release' and I say what they say. Deal with it.

Both right in our own way and no changing of either mind.

So have a good day. I outa' here.

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 21:59 -0700, Bob Arendt wrote:

Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:30 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:22 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:16 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 19:47 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

You have not actually tried it, have you ? Your 10000 network users are not going to show up in the user list, since we only populate the list with local users.

How are you distinguishing local users from any other kind?

Local users are the ones you get by reading /etc/passwd.

So, you've got a separate reader of /etc/passwd independent of the normal glibc lookup for users in gdm?

No need; glibc offers fgetpwent.

Doesn't fgetpwent provide all users via the methods listed for passwd in /etc/nsswitch.conf ?

No, fgetpwent only reads the file that it is given.

F8's gdm is listing our whole company as listed by provided by NIS. Has F9 changed this ?

Yes, F9 has changed this. The user list in F9 shows local users + anybody who has ever logged in to this machine.

Bob Arendt wrote:

Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:30 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:22 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:16 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 19:47 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

You have not actually tried it, have you ? Your 10000 network users are not going to show up in the user list, since we only populate the list with local users.

How are you distinguishing local users from any other kind?

Local users are the ones you get by reading /etc/passwd.

So, you've got a separate reader of /etc/passwd independent of the normal glibc lookup for users in gdm?

No need; glibc offers fgetpwent.

Doesn't fgetpwent provide all users via the methods listed for passwd in /etc/nsswitch.conf ? F8's gdm is listing our whole company as listed by provided by NIS. Has F9 changed this ?

Actually, it's fgetpwent(FILE *stream) You don't even need to pass it /etc/passwd... it could be any file stream formatted like /etc/passwd

getpwent(void) returns users from all system sources.

run "man fgetpwent" or "man getpwent" for more details.

Rainman

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 09:29 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:

On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 12:22:47AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

...

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 00:16 -0400, seth vidal wrote:

...

How are you distinguishing local users from any other kind?

Local users are the ones you get by reading /etc/passwd.

As somebody recently explained on this list, and I have seen done in practice as well, some NIS files are periodically synchronized to local machines; /etc/passwd in particular. This is done to have at least some functionality if NIS went away for a moment.

People using such tactics, and with a bigger /etc/passwd, will be for a surprise.

I am doing the converse: I keep all network-wide users (== all "ordinary users") in NIS and only have a very small set of local users :)

Ralf

2008/4/29 Leslie Satenstein lsatenstein@yahoo.com:

Actually, when compared to F8 main greeting panel, it is less then attactive.

Again, this very subjective. I do like the new one much better. The latest koji build has deteriorated the animation though which is very jumpy now. Current hardware should allow for a smoother transition, shouldn't it?