Hello I have read that if one doesn't want to have X listen for remote connections one need only change ... :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 to :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 -nolisten tcp in the file ... /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers I have done so. I restarted xdm but netstat still shows X listening on all interfaces. I rebooted and still X is listening for remote connections. Anyone any ideas what the problem may be or which other config files could be changed to have the same effect. t-irvine
You can also put this line in whatever start file you use ..such as .zshrc, .bashrc or .profile. alias startx='startx -- -nolisten tcp' This will make sure that X doesn't listen on port 6000. You can also use the SuSEfirewall2 to block in common on that port. * irvine@vuosaari.hai.fi (irvine@vuosaari.hai.fi) [021230 06:54]: ::Hello :: ::I have read that if one doesn't want to have X listen ::for remote connections one need only change ... :: :: :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 :: to :: :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 -nolisten tcp :: ::in the file ... :: :: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers :: ::I have done so. I restarted xdm but netstat still shows ::X listening on all interfaces. I rebooted and still X ::is listening for remote connections. :: ::Anyone any ideas what the problem may be or which other ::config files could be changed to have the same effect. -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org Tell me what you believe.. I'll tell you what you should see.
On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 08:38:09AM -0800, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
alias startx='startx -- -nolisten tcp'
At the moment X is starting when the systems boots - that is I don't use startx to start X.
This will make sure that X doesn't listen on port 6000. You can also use the SuSEfirewall2 to block in common on that port.
I am aware that one can use some firewall rule to block connections to port 6000, but I was hoping to find some config file that I could add some rule to. Thanx anyway! t.irvine
irvine@vuosaari.hai.fi writes:
I have read that if one doesn't want to have X listen for remote connections one need only change ...
:0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 to :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 vt07 -nolisten tcp
in the file ...
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers
The file Xservers seems to be everywhere ... 1. /etc/opt/kde3/share/config/kdm/Xservers 2. /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers 3. /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers Try the second one instead. Actually, I see something strange on my system: $ ls -li /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers The i-node number is the same and the link count is 1. I don't have time to investigate it. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 06:58:33PM +0100, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
The file Xservers seems to be everywhere ...
1. /etc/opt/kde3/share/config/kdm/Xservers 2. /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers 3. /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers
Try the second one instead.
I just realised that I am using kdm and so should have used /etc/opt/kde3/share/config/kdm/Xservers.
Actually, I see something strange on my system:
$ ls -li /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers
The i-node number is the same and the link count is 1. I don't have time to investigate it.
I think this means that one file is a hard link to the other file - that is they are the same file. thanx for the help. t.irvine
irvine@vuosaari.hai.fi writes:
Actually, I see something strange on my system:
$ ls -li /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers 68197 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 747 2002-02-20 16:48 /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/Xservers
The i-node number is the same and the link count is 1. I don't have time to investigate it.
I think this means that one file is a hard link to the other file - that is they are the same file.
Yes, they are hard links but the link count is defined as the number of directory entries which share the inode. See the following: $ touch h1; ln h1 h2; ls -li h1 h2 156734 -rw-r--r-- 2 malusek malusek 0 2002-12-30 20:20 h1 156734 -rw-r--r-- 2 malusek malusek 0 2002-12-30 20:20 h2 ^^^ link count The link count of the former case is 1. I wonder how it works in this case. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
participants (3)
-
Alexandr Malusek -
Ben Rosenberg -
irvine＠vuosaari.hai.fi