--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
GDM failing to start stumpwm after merge |
|
Date: |
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 23:30:05 -0500 |
|
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.2 |
Hey all
I just reconfigured my system configuration after the big staging merge
to master. I use StumpWM.
GDM seems to be starting just fine, but after this reconfiguration
stumpwm or X or something is crashing for me and looping me back to GDM.
Where are the logs I can view for this? I see some message appear but
quickly disappear before looping back into GDM.
If I can get the logs I can share them or try and figure it out myself.
Best,
Brett Gilio
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#35484: GDM failing to start stumpwm after merge |
|
Date: |
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 23:20:04 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Brett,
Brett Gilio <address@hidden> writes:
> Timothy Sample writes:
>
>> Hi Brett,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> I can think of two options for a fix before 1.0 (which is supposed to be
>> tomorrow!). The cute one is to just rename “Fail” to “~Fail”, on the
>> expectation that this will come after most other names when sorted. The
>> ugly one is to patch GDM to exclude the placeholder file when looking
>> for “.desktop” files, and then to select it instead of raising an error
>> when it can’t find anything.
>>
>> My preference is for the ugly one, because the cute one feels like
>> putting a silly hack on top of silly hack – it’s just a bit too much.
>> I’ve attached a patch. Thoughts? (If I don’t hear anything, I will
>> push it – it’s important that this works for 1.0).
>>
>>
>> In the future, we should find a way to make GDM errors less
>> catastrophic, but I doubt we could do that in a day (I certainly
>> couldn’t)!
>>
>>> Thank you for looking into this Tim! I have gone back to SLiM for the
>>> time being until it is fixed :).
>>>
>>> If anybody else is having this issue, going back to SLiM is really
>>> easy, check out my commit for reference.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/brettgilio/guix-system/commit/64d389db13c2f78ee5c58af28c1639b098113c93
>>
>> Thanks for providing this. Hopefully it helps anybody else having
>> problems.
>>
>>
>> -- Tim
>
> I think the uglier version is more generic and less likely to cause
> future errors. But, it is a matter of time. The uglier one is likely
> going to be more terse.
>
> Do you need any help on my end?
No, but thank you for offering and thanks for catching my mistake before
we released 1.0. :)
I pushed e8c6e771c199c02b748eb66d3a03c46d2a32ca29 to master, which
should fix this. Hence, I’m closing the bug.
-- Tim
--- End Message ---