From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 23 13:50:15 2017 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2017 18:50:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39394 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjh1-0005sL-0t for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:50:15 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58149) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcW-0005l0-Tx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcP-0004nZ-61 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:31 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:38153) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcP-0004nS-2y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:29 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49115) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcO-0004ne-1G for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcK-0004mt-VD for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:28 -0500 Received: from latitanza.investici.org ([82.94.249.234]:47078) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVjcK-0004mg-Ke for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:45:24 -0500 Received: from [82.94.249.234] (latitanza [82.94.249.234]) (Authenticated sender: niasterisk@grrlz.net) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6030E120628 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:45:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cryptolab.net; s=stigmate; t=1485197122; bh=/abKeRmAtHhu3QaTaEVpJ4pGDHhLDrEfVXd90xvfu3k=; h=From:To:Subject:Date; b=qpWA2Vx0mjbndDFxZNLXH1o9IH3qvGUjjSf0Bt5qjH0FEJImf/Hg3mK28IILnLlNA ayY/c36ibOjzIYvUN6Qf7m9hfFP4U5q+qbix3303HNTMckwSKLgAIBvT6PVb9CCmJC V+p+tjzT3iA8TC/OYf2a2SCNJ7MLnbZYIA8Gu1mk= From: ng0 To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: SDDM segfaults X11 session on first reconfigure Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:45:15 +0000 Message-ID: <87bmuxlio4.fsf@wasp.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.1 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:50:14 -0500 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.1 (----) I noticed this: My system uses SLIM. I build the new system config which includes SDDM instead, reconfigure, and at the point where SDDM service probably gets started, SDDM segfaults the current X11 session. This is a grave error with SDDM and needs some better way of handling the initial activation of the new display manager. --=20 =E2=99=A5=E2=92=B6 ng0 -- https://www.inventati.org/patternsinthechaos/