Trying to use Ubuntu as a Kiosk platform. 13.04 doesn't work because the video is borked on our netbooks without nomodeset, which destroys the performance. I'd use 12.04 LTS, but Firefox doesn't work as guest on any version of ubuntu because it doesn't support proxy env vars. And on the LTS version... THIS? Is there a single version of Ubuntu that doesn't have a major show-stopping bug? Particularly with the ability to browse the internet? How can this be such a "low" priority when internet browsing is pretty much the whole point of the guest account? In this day, what function of the computer is more important than the internet browser? I don't want to admit that Windows ThinPC is a better kiosk platform than Ubuntu. But right now it is the only thing we can get working, and it is easy-peasy, where-as I've wasted close to two weeks trying to build a viable Ubuntu option, seemingly a simple task, due to all of these bugs...
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop Packages, which is subscribed to gdm-guest-session in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/577919 Title: chromium-browser fails to start (guest account, OpenVZ): "Failed to move to new PID namespace: Operation not permitted" Status in Chromium Browser: Unknown Status in Light Display Manager: Fix Released Status in OpenVZ kernel (patchset): Confirmed Status in “gdm-guest-session” package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in “lightdm” package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in “lightdm-remote-session-freerdp” package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in “lightdm-remote-session-uccsconfigure” package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: Binary package hint: chromium-browser [Impact] Chromium-browser does not launch from guest session. Fix by Jamie Strandboge: "It would be nice if AppArmor could merge profiles, but we can't yet, so we need to do like you initially did: have two mostly identical profiles. Because the lightdm remote sessions are shipping policy copies, the maintenance cost is getting high. I will be abstracting out the guest rules into abstracations/lightdm and then have a small snippet using a child profile in abstractions/lightdm_chromium-browser. The guest and remote lightdm profiles can just include these and all the policy is in the abstractions. Using a lightdm.d directory is a good idea, but upstream AppArmor is currently discussing how to best handle .d directories like this, and I'd rather not add another one until that discussions is finished." [Test Case] Login to the guest account after booting in Ubuntu Precise and try to run Chromium-browser. [Regression Potential] Upstream work on AppArmor was considered here and a child profile was added not touching the other policies so the regression potential is pretty low. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04 Package: chromium-browser 5.0.342.9~r43360-0ubuntu2 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2 Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686 Architecture: i386 Date: Sun May 9 19:49:44 2010 InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 10.04 "Lucid Lynx" - Beta i386 (20100318) ProcEnviron: LANG=tr_TR.utf8 SHELL=/bin/bash SourcePackage: chromium-browser To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/chromium-browser/+bug/577919/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
