Debian Bug report logs - #34074
xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>

To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org>

Cc: debian-testing@lists.debian.org, submit@bugs.debian.org, xbase@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 14:34:23 -0500

Package: boot-floppies
Version: 2.1.8
Severity: important

>>>>> "Stephane" == Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org> writes:
Stephane> On Tuesday 2 March 1999, at 10 h 2, the keyboard of Adam Di
Stephane> Carlo <aph@debian.org> wrote:
>> Will you be able to remove xbase/xdm from the profiles?  I would
>> like to get that in 2.1.9...

Stephane> Ooops, this would be a real change! Any formal bug against
Stephane> this problem?  Removing xdm certainly breaks the system as
Stephane> far as many users are concerned.

Huh?  We're talking about installs from scratch here, not upgrades.
From words written by the X11 maintainer for Debian:

     `xbase' is now an effectively empty package that exists only to have
     the package management system automatically "pull in" the new packages
     (and the latest versions of the X libraries). Once it has been
     upgraded, it may be safely removed.

Since we're not upgrading it, we should never install it in the first
place.

Stephane> (xdm was there in hamm and there was no bug report against
Stephane> this problem.)

Xdm was in hamm because it had to be.

Users are going to experience many many problems installing xdm on
their machine.  It is setup to start automatically (when there's a
valid parsable XF86Config file, I believe).  This can lead to the
notorious "infinite X11 reset loop" which is very very frustrating,
confusing, and infuriating for users.

The fact is that newbie users shouldn't be pulling in xdm on thier
machines.  I know it's late to change this but I do think it's
important.  I don't care, you could just remove xbase, then add back
all the packages that it depends on:

     The new packages in the Debian XFree86 distribution are `rstart',
     `rstartd', `twm', `xbase-clients', `xdm', `xfree86-common', `xfs',
     `xmh', `xproxy', `xserver-common', `xsm', and `xterm'.

*minus* xdm. While you're at it, xmh isn't very useful to most poeple
either.

Is it at all possible to fix this for 2.1.9 ?

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Message #10 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org>

To: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>

Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org>, debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 22:36:13 +0100

On Wednesday 3 March 1999, at 14 h 34, 
Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> wrote:

>      `xbase' is now an effectively empty package that exists only to have
>      the package management system automatically "pull in" the new packages
...
> Since we're not upgrading it, we should never install it in the first
> place.

I still do not see where is the problem or the bug. The boot-floppies packages 
installs (more exactly, set selections) only for packages which are listed in 
the preselections (the "master" file) and xbase is NOT in it. grep it if you 
don't believe me.

> Users are going to experience many many problems installing xdm on
> their machine.  It is setup to start automatically (when there's a
> valid parsable XF86Config file, I believe).

Yes, if there is no XF86config, xdm is smart enough to give in.

>  This can lead to the
> notorious "infinite X11 reset loop" which is very very frustrating,
> confusing, and infuriating for users.

OK, xdm cannot run, so people cannot log in (we assume we talk about home 
machines without a network access) to fix it. They don't know CtrlAltF1 
either. Correct? May I suggest to document at least the CtrlAltF1 so they can 
go back to a text console?

> The fact is that newbie users shouldn't be pulling in xdm on thier
> machines. 

Hmmm, it means that Joe User will not have what he calls on Usenet "a 
graphical login". It is a problem, too.

> I know it's late to change this but I do think it's
> important.  

My personal opinion is: yes, it's too late, much too late. We have enough work 
with "indisputable" bugs and I suggest to let "dubious" bugs live.

--
http://www.debian.org/~bortz/

Message #15 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Jeremiah Merkl" <merkjj@uleth.ca>

To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org>

Cc: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> , debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 15:12:26 -0700 (Mountain Standard Time)

On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> >  This can lead to the
> > notorious "infinite X11 reset loop" which is very very frustrating,
> > confusing, and infuriating for users.
> 
> OK, xdm cannot run, so people cannot log in (we assume we talk about home 
> machines without a network access) to fix it. They don't know CtrlAltF1 
> either. Correct? May I suggest to document at least the CtrlAltF1 so they can 
> go back to a text console?

Actually, Just yesterday I was attempting an install of the hamm on a
laptop, and got myself stuck in the reset loop. I couldn't figure out what
to do about it.

Major problem was, after the test of X ran during install (which went OK)
the screen went a nice, white color and refused to budge. I've had this
happen on a couple other laptops with a C&T card in them. Only way out was
Ctrl-Alt-Del, bounce the machine, and be done with it. Unfortunately, XDM
was set to run on startup, so we got a wonderful blinky-blink of the
text-login, in which you could type, if you timed everything correctly.
C-A-F1 didn't work, niether did the rest of the F-keys. We couldn't telnet
into the box ("Connection Refused") which is probably due to the fact that
we interrupted Dselect in the middle of an install run. It was a mess, so
we had to start all over again. Whee.

> > The fact is that newbie users shouldn't be pulling in xdm on thier
> > machines. 
> Hmmm, it means that Joe User will not have what he calls on Usenet "a 
> graphical login". It is a problem, too.

Sorry to say it, but I have to agree with Stephane. The fact that newbies
"shouldn't install XDM" is idiotic. Do you seriously think that even half
of the people whos brains have been turned to cheese curd by Win95 could
handle not using the mouse at all? Hell, I've done 5-6 installs, and have
had a different problem with XDM every stinkin time. I'm in no way a
newbie, but I sure ain't a guru like most of the people around here.

At one early point in my linux career, I was told "you're a newbie. You
shouldn't be recompiling the kernel!". Hey, I wanted sound. And in the
Debian FAQ there are rather simplistic instructions on how to do it. So...
I didn't break anything, but got really confused when the compile kept
failing because I didn't have bin86 installed...

> > I know it's late to change this but I do think it's
> > important.  
> 
> My personal opinion is: yes, it's too late, much too late. We have enough work 
> with "indisputable" bugs and I suggest to let "dubious" bugs live.
> 

:) well said. The only concern that I have, as an end user, is "I sure
hope these other bugs get fixed eventually too".

-Jeremiah Merkl

Message #20 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>

To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@debian.org>

Cc: debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 18:23:37 -0500

In message <199903032136.WAA08104@ludwigV.sources.org> you wrote:
>I still do not see where is the problem or the bug. The boot-floppies packages 
>installs (more exactly, set selections) only for packages which are listed in 
>the preselections (the "master" file) and xbase is NOT in it. grep it if you 
>don't believe me.

Pardon me!  That's what I get for not using the source!

>> The fact is that newbie users shouldn't be pulling in xdm on thier
>> machines. 
>
>Hmmm, it means that Joe User will not have what he calls on Usenet "a 
>graphical login". It is a problem, too.
>
>> I know it's late to change this but I do think it's
>> important.  
>
>My personal opinion is: yes, it's too late, much too late. We have enough work 
>with "indisputable" bugs and I suggest to let "dubious" bugs live.

That's a valid POV.  I am happy to close the bug.  But I'd like to hear from 
<debian-testing> folks.  Because if the consensus is that xdm should not be
installed for the standard profiles, I don't think it's too late to fix this.

Here's the current master entries:

[M68K:
xdm: Tasks: Admin, C, Chinese, Database, Debian, Devel, Dialup, Doc, Fortran, Games, Graphics, Gui_devel, Lisp, Net_comp, Net_sel, Netadm, Newbie, News, Perl_devel, Plot, Prod, Python, Scheme, Science, Sgml, Sound, Standard, Tcl_devel, Tex, Web, Workst, X_comp, X_sel,  Profiles: Admin, Devel_comp, Devel_std, Dialup, Server_comp, Server_std, Standard, Work_sci, Work_std, 
:M68K]
[NOT_M68K:
xdm: Tasks: Games, Graphics, X_comp, X_sel,  Profiles: Admin, Devel_comp, Devel_std, Dialup, Work_sci, Work_std, 
:NOT_M68K]

As you can see, xdm is associated with a *lot* of the tasks and profiles.
This is what I have a problem with.

--
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Message #25 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mr Brian May <bam@silas-2.cc.monash.edu.au>

Cc: 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#34074: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 10:23:32 +1100

In article <199903032136.WAA08104@ludwigV.sources.org> you write:
>> Users are going to experience many many problems installing xdm on
>> their machine.  It is setup to start automatically (when there's a
>> valid parsable XF86Config file, I believe).
>
>Yes, if there is no XF86config, xdm is smart enough to give in.
>
>>  This can lead to the
>> notorious "infinite X11 reset loop" which is very very frustrating,
>> confusing, and infuriating for users.
>
>OK, xdm cannot run, so people cannot log in (we assume we talk about home 
>machines without a network access) to fix it. They don't know CtrlAltF1 
>either. Correct? May I suggest to document at least the CtrlAltF1 so they can 
>go back to a text console?

Just my two cents:

If a user is upgrading from Hamm to Slink, and has a XF86Config that
*appears* to be valid be isn't (maybe xdm has been disabled because of
problems with starting X), then updating xbase (and hence xdm) will
break the system.

eg: I have disabled xdm because my Super VGA monitor died, and I have
been forced to replace it with a VGA monitor. I don't know if installing
the latest version of xdm will automatically start it straight away, but
either way, I don't want X trying to display 1024*768 on my monochrome
VGA monitor.

Before I upgrade to slink, I will move XF86Config to something like
XF86Config.bad before hand (or just reconfigure xdm not to use the local
screen), but other people may not realize that.

BTW: If you do encounter the "infinite X11 reset loop", pushing
Ctrl+Alt+F1 will not help, as X will quit and reload before you get a
chance to do anything useful, hence switching the active TTY back to
that of the X screen. Network logins will work though, if you have a
LAN... I remember that all this was discussed some time ago on
debian-devel, and I am surprised that I still hear it to be a problem.
The last I heard was the xdm has configuration resources to delay
restarting X if an error occured, but they didn't work as documented.

However, I understand that it is too late to do anything about this
for Slink now :-(

- --Boundary_(ID_9AuLaKIndFI2ZxJk3d9jAg)--

------- End of Forwarded Message

Message #30 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: sharkey@superk.physics.sunysb.edu

To: debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 08:42:53 +0900

> That's a valid POV.  I am happy to close the bug.  But I'd like to hear from 
> <debian-testing> folks.  Because if the consensus is that xdm should not be
> installed for the standard profiles, I don't think it's too late to fix this.

Since you asked....

I don't think xdm belongs installed unless the user specifically requests it.

xdm serves two purposes.  One is the ability to manage displays on network
terminals.  Any user attempting to set this up should already be familiar
with Linux.  It's not the type of thing most new users want to do.

The other is the graphical login which automatically starts X for all users.
This provides zero functionality, it's just eye candy.

Personally, I find xdm to be a great pain when a system isn't broken in yet.
I can handle it, though, but from the point of view of a newbie, we need
to weigh "Linux didn't have a graphical login." against "I couldn't get linux
to run on my system at all!".  I think having 50 of the former makes up
for avoiding 1 of the latter.

I vote for taking xdm out of the default profiles, and no, I don't think it's
too late, either.

Eric

Message #35 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Pann McCuaig <pann@ssc.com>

To: sharkey@ale.physics.sunysb.edu, debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 15:51:56 -0800

On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 08:42 (+0900), sharkey@ale.physics.sunysb.edu wrote:
> > That's a valid POV.  I am happy to close the bug.  But I'd like to hear from 
> > <debian-testing> folks.  Because if the consensus is that xdm should not be
> > installed for the standard profiles, I don't think it's too late to fix this.

HEAR, HEAR!

> 
> Since you asked....
> 
> I don't think xdm belongs installed unless the user specifically requests it.
> 
> xdm serves two purposes.  One is the ability to manage displays on network
> terminals.  Any user attempting to set this up should already be familiar
> with Linux.  It's not the type of thing most new users want to do.
> 
> The other is the graphical login which automatically starts X for all users.
> This provides zero functionality, it's just eye candy.
> 
> Personally, I find xdm to be a great pain when a system isn't broken in yet.
> I can handle it, though, but from the point of view of a newbie, we need
> to weigh "Linux didn't have a graphical login." against "I couldn't get linux
> to run on my system at all!".  I think having 50 of the former makes up
> for avoiding 1 of the latter.
> 
> I vote for taking xdm out of the default profiles, and no, I don't think it's
> too late, either.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> --  
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-- 
Pann McCuaig          pann@ssc.com       PO Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155
Technical Manager                          Phone: (206) 782-7733 ext 122
SSC, Inc.             www.ssc.com            Fax: (206) 782-7191
Linux Journal         www.linuxjournal.com

Message #40 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julian Gilbey <jdg@maths.qmw.ac.uk>

To: debian-testing@lists.debian.org, 34074@bugs.debian.org, adam@onshore.com

Subject: Bug#34074: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 12:56:25 +0000 (GMT)

> Major problem was, after the test of X ran during install (which went
> OK) the screen went a nice, white color and refused to budge. I've had
> this happen on a couple other laptops with a C&T card in them. Only
> way out was Ctrl-Alt-Del, bounce the machine, and be done with
> it. Unfortunately, XDM was set to run on startup, so we got a
> wonderful blinky-blink of the text-login, in which you could type, if
> you timed everything correctly.  C-A-F1 didn't work, niether did the
> rest of the F-keys. We couldn't telnet into the box ("Connection
> Refused") which is probably due to the fact that we interrupted
> Dselect in the middle of an install run. It was a mess, so we had to
> start all over again. Whee.

When I first started maintaining my Debian machine about a year ago
(which was the first time I was no longer just a user) on a box with
C&T, I had exactly the same problems.  The only way I could solve them
was by reading Running Linux, figuring how to reboot in single-user
mode, switching off the xdm autostartup in /etc/rc2.d/S??xdm and
rebooting.  Now THAT is not something we should be expecting new users
to do.

The 'proper' solution would probably be to install xdm but require it
to be explicitly turned on.  For example, the user could be
recommended to try running xdm 'by hand' (by calling
/etc/init.d/xdm start) as root once X is working (as tested by startx
as a normal user).  If this works, then rc-update.d could be used to
install xdm.  Not too much like hard work, but may save some
heartache.

   Julian

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
             Debian GNU/Linux Developer.  jdg@debian.org
       -*- Finger jdg@master.debian.org for my PGP public key. -*-

Message #45 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Adam Di Carlo <aph@debian.org>

To: 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: ["Marcelo E. Magallon" <mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr>] Re: Latest install report

Date: 15 Mar 1999 23:45:31 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

From the debian-testing list, as more evidence that, for the Profiles,
we shouldn't be installing xbase, really.  It's just a backwards
compatability package.

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: "Marcelo E. Magallon" <mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr>

To: Martin Bialasinski <martin@internet-treff.uni-koeln.de>

Cc: Ian Redfern <redferni@logica.com>, Debian Testing Group <debian-testing@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Latest install report

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:08:37 -0600

On Wed, Feb 17, 1999 at 09:49:01PM +0100, Martin Bialasinski wrote:

> You hardly have a chance. One of the X packages suggests xdm. And you
> know how persistant dselect is about suggests :-(

xfree86-common suggests xdm; xbase depends on it.  xbase should not be
installed at all, it's there for backwards compatibility.  dselect will be a
little persistant about the suggestion, but not as persistant as if it was a
recommendation.

> What I fear is, that (new)users install X (and xdm, like dselect
> suggests). Then don't finish X configuration, or misconfigure X. Then they
> give up for the day. Next time they start Debian, they get the blinking
> screen syndrom, when xdm tries to start the X server ad infinitum.

Well, a lot of effort has been put into the X packages to prevent that from
happening.  First, there's parse-xf86config, which tries to catch a lot of
showstoppers in /etc/X11/XF86Config.  If you still manage to make a non
valid XF86Config (invalid sync ranges, like 2-3, could do this), then xdm
will start and stop up to four times (not sure about the number, could be
six) (I know it works, I'm confident about it, I've tested it on several
situations).  After that, xdm won't stop (it has to serve remote sessions)
but it will disable the faulty local server.

> Then we will have a hard time telling them how to disable xdm in
> singleuser mode.

linux single, chmod 0000 /etc/init.d/xdm should do it.

> Policy says, that a package should be functional after installation. I 
> don't know if this is wise for xdm. Maybe it should come disabled and
> print a message how to enable in in postinst.

Hmm... that's a good point.


						Marcelo


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Message #50 received at 34074@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Adam Di Carlo <aph@debian.org>

To: control@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 34074@bugs.debian.org

Subject: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: 04 Apr 1999 03:35:16 -0500

severity 34074 normal
thanks

I'm not seeing a lot of complaints about this, so I'm dropping it back
to 'normal' severity.

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Message #57 received at 34074-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>

To: 34074-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: xdm login loop failure has happend to a newbie

Date: 18 Aug 1999 01:27:18 -0400

Closing this bug, never seen it actually reported in slink anymore...

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.