Bug#560968: gdm: seems to have incorrect startup dependencies and stops too early
wijnen at debian.org
Mon Dec 14 12:30:22 UTC 2009
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:10:26PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 13 décembre 2009 à 04:00 +0100, Bas Wijnen a écrit :
> > Since I upgraded to dependency-based boot, there are two problems:
> > - Sometimes the initial server startup fails. Gdm then tries a second
> > time. This does work, but the automatic login is not used, so I need
> > to manually log in in that case. Because the new server successfully
> > starts, I can't find a log of the failure.
> This is a recurring issue that can be summarized as “first login always
Well, certainly not always, in my case. Just sometimes. I'd estimate
about once every 8 boots or so.
> I’d appreciate if you could have a look at your logs (auth.log
> and syslog) and see if anything goes wrong at login time.
Dec 14 09:34:00 vlam gdm: pam_unix(gdm:auth): authentication
failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=:0 ruser= rhost= user=shevek
Dec 14 09:34:05 vlam gdm: pam_unix(gdm:session): session opened
for user shevek by (uid=0)
Dec 14 09:34:05 vlam gdm: pam_ck_connector(gdm:session): nox11
mode, ignoring PAM_TTY :0
Dec 14 09:34:03 vlam gdm: WARNING: Kon gebruiker niet aanmelden
which means "could not log in user".
So appearantly there is an "authentication failure", but I don't know
what it is. Is there a way to get more information in the logs? I'd
happily send that to you as well.
> > - When powering off using gnome, the X server is killed, then gdm
> > restarts it, and during this restart gdm is stopped. Eventually the
> > system does shut down, but it seems to take much longer than it should
> > because of this. Gdm should not try to restart X when the machine is
> > shutting down: it should be the first thing to be stopped, and that
> > should be the reason for X dying. It seems that X is killed before
> > gdm is stopped.
> This is probably fixed by GDM 2.28, but this one is still not in Debian
> because of the huge number of regressions.
Ok, at least it is being worked on then. :-)
> > I put those in one bug report because I think they are the same bug,
> > namely an error in the boot dependencies. If I'm wrong about that,
> > please clone and rename as appropriate.
> None of this is a dependency issue, these are two distinct bugs.
Sorry for the confusion in that case.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the pkg-gnome-maintainers