From tom@eborcom.com Fri Feb 19 07:37:39 1999
Return-Path: <tom@eborcom.com>
Received: from mail10.svr.pol.co.uk (mail10.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.214])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38CE711760
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:37:33 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from tom@eborcom.com)
Received: from modem-82.platinum.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.38.210])
	by mail10.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #1)
	id 10Drzd-0006jb-00
	for FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:37:30 +0000
Received: (qmail 3018 invoked by uid 5000); 19 Feb 1999 15:18:54 -0000
Message-Id: <19990219151854.3017.qmail@eborcom.com>
Date: 19 Feb 1999 15:18:54 -0000
From: Tom Hukins <tom@eborcom.com>
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Minor fix: kdebase11
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.2

>Number:         10162
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       Fix kdmrc to add qmail usernames to NoUsers
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    will
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Fri Feb 19 07:40:01 PST 1999
>Closed-Date:    Wed Aug 30 19:37:40 PDT 2000
>Last-Modified:  Wed Aug 30 19:38:41 PDT 2000
>Originator:     Tom Hukins
>Release:        FreeBSD 2.2.8-STABLE i386
>Organization:
eBORcOM
>Environment:

FreeBSD machine with qmail-1.03 and kde11 installed.

>Description:

patch-at in kdebase11 includes modifications to kdmrc to exclude
certain users from the login window. The patch below adds usernames
which are added by qmail to this list. This makes KDM look tidier on
machines where qmail is installed.

Also, this port installs kvt in $PREFIX/bin. patch-an and patch-ao
modify kdm so it can write to utmp and lastlog. However, the port is
not installed setuid root so these patches have no effect unless the
user changes ownership of the kvt executable to root, and sets the
setuid flag. Is this intended, perhaps for security reasons, or is
it an oversight?

>How-To-Repeat:

	

>Fix:
	
diff -ruN kdebase11.old/patches/patch-at kdebase11/patches/patch-at
--- kdebase11.old/patches/patch-at	Sat Jan  9 12:43:19 1999
+++ kdebase11/patches/patch-at	Fri Feb 19 15:07:57 1999
@@ -10,6 +10,6 @@
 --- 9,13 ----
   SortUsers=true
   #Users=root;johndoe
-! NoUsers=bin;bind;daemon;games;halt;kmem;mail;man;mta;news;nobody;operator;pop;reboot;shutdown;sync;tty;uucp;xten;
+! NoUsers=alias;bin;bind;daemon;games;halt;kmem;mail;man;mta;news;nobody;operator;pop;qmaild;qmaill;qmailp;qmailq;qmailr;qmails;reboot;shutdown;sync;tty;uucp;xten;
   GreetString=K Desktop Environment [HOSTNAME]
   UserView=true

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports->se 
Responsible-Changed-By: dirk 
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Mar 29 11:30:45 PST 1999 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Over to port's maintainer. 
Responsible-Changed-From-To: se->will 
Responsible-Changed-By: steve 
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon May 29 16:02:54 PDT 2000 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Will now maintains the KDE ports. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=10162 
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: will 
State-Changed-When: Wed Aug 30 19:37:40 PDT 2000 
State-Changed-Why:  
This type of problem should be solved at the root, not hacked 
around by adding usernames to the exemption list every time 
we decide another port needs such a thing.  I'm sure that the 
KDE folks have fixed this in the current KDE2 kdm. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=10162 
>Unformatted:
