catch-22: lpd v (pam & gdm)
 

Well, I could google on until the cows come home ....

But maybe someone could tell me what ownership + permissions on a RH8 /var will keep both lpd and (pam + gdm) happy!

Unless /var is root:root 755 it seems pam objects "owner != 0" or "permissions lax". And gdm throws a fit in that case.

When /var is root:root 755, the checkpc script in lpd invocation throws a fit AND (WORSE!) causes /var to be changed to lp:lp. And worse still, if lpd is auto-invoked during boot ( then gdm is in real trouble!)

The error mis-messages in both cases complain of non-existence nonsense, when of course it must be just one of those messy owner /permissions problems (I think). And just copying my FC4 settings doesn't seem to solve the RH8 bind?

help?

cheers. Ystack

AFAIK lpd should not be checking /var but only some part of the subtree, maybe something like /var/lpd or whatever it should be confined to.

agreed
 

Yes, I agree. Even though lpd did at least report it's gung-ho behaviour, it flashed past far too fast on the boot screen to get on to.
1. It should NEVER behave like that in a boot context (I hold) where print-priority is clearly secondary to login-priority and 2. If it does, then a sizeable delay should follow. (May be corrected in later versions?).

Luckily I could resort eventually to kdm which seems less sensitive to /var permissions. Although I think I eventually found out(not easily) what the REQUIRED PERMISSIONS are for both lpd and gdm, I still call it poor software that has precise settings requirements and doesn't reveal PRECISELY WHAT THEY ARE when obviously croaking on the fact of their absence!

Ystack