From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id sOohNFRUuF4DHQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 10 May 2020 19:21:56 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id yFP8HmJUuF5eQgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 10 May 2020 19:22:10 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2830940C73 for ; Sun, 10 May 2020 19:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:54302 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrWa-0004ok-HL for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:22:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49812) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrWU-0004oF-8j for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:22:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:38885) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrWT-0005aF-Vg for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:22:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrWT-0004LH-Re for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:22:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#35305] LightDM service Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 2020 19:22:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 35305 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: L p R n d n Cc: 35305@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 35305-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B35305.158913849116646 (code B ref 35305); Sun, 10 May 2020 19:22:01 +0000 Received: (at 35305) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 May 2020 19:21:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50431 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrVy-0004KP-U1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:21:31 -0400 Received: from sender4-of-o53.zoho.com ([136.143.188.53]:21355) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jXrVw-0004KE-D7 for 35305@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2020 15:21:29 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1589138473; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=YDJkVHYafIb1BzQfzIregvLC+qiUOdbTYkyt1pbCz/gtyWR42GJ670WaBe2QTvzde4OkkndOLv9YLjBNwCN/FdbOGlzk+Cac1ebDxxk1KETkpZBa05BCxK5kmeXwHtTZ+CykyFdn33xq2N2d0AtMvh+bEKdxELyNOsMtjInHNqE= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1589138473; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=xmcVTjAIGrqeh7HBFcTNkkSdmxb/8rkYiJYYRZ4aHDY=; b=SzFnZwMn4PnMy93q0pZs34B3gyVaogTJqD4Yk1OvuszOCZTMFX2q6MrZ2+0lySo2Puk6/4iG3Zw6I7nmhGesPw7dZoaPNOwWvfxyyHJM3suSsWo07qEXLtRBAqpkeHN6oSiVnmBzBtbeHqB8rqXBVYmp9LTiWxF3yLnjM0oikz8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1589138473; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-reply-to:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=xmcVTjAIGrqeh7HBFcTNkkSdmxb/8rkYiJYYRZ4aHDY=; b=IAp2W/vPAdRShZdxjAnRrxofEeu/Z6s6F1p0AeXEJnEiIvZjgC7YFHZGVq5wc/gC ACI8KscTGbJK4laSub6JEDBUcnnBOyP3vn/JTlmAhYE1zX5kJZg5PYm8pTUMrgtR0sP 40eB1/Z/gYXjDBBa0Z6PAb8F7lkbnFB4CVIzBi68= Received: from localhost (p4FD5A118.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.213.161.24]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1589138471838331.6309583690686; Sun, 10 May 2020 12:21:11 -0700 (PDT) References: <87zhooso9g.fsf@lprndn.info> <87imh9gnvy.fsf@lprndn.info> <87k11m2hqx.fsf@elephly.net> <87zhahcfgh.fsf@lprndn.info> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3 From: Ricardo Wurmus In-reply-to: <87zhahcfgh.fsf@lprndn.info> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Date: Sun, 10 May 2020 21:21:08 +0200 Message-ID: <878shz38bf.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: 1.99 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=elephly.net header.s=zoho header.b=IAp2W/vP; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [1.99 / 13.00]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.5390702759975]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.51.188.0/24:c]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.08), country: US(-0.00), ip: 209.51.188.17(-0.54)]; DWL_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[209.51.188.17:server fail]; R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[elephly.net:s=zoho]; ARC_REJECT(2.00)[signature check failed: fail, {[1] = sig:zohomail.com:reject}]; MX_GOOD(-0.50)[cached: eggs.gnu.org]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[elephly.net:-]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[79.213.161.24:received]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:209.51.188.0/24, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[rekado@elephly.net,guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[lprndn.info:email]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[elephly.net]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[209.51.188.17:from]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[209.51.188.17:from]; RCVD_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[8]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: BlljzKQEFxfr L p R n d n writes: >> I built a VM and noticed that all icons are missing. Should the service >> arrange for a certain fallback icon theme to be installed? > > If you only added (service-type lightdm-service-type) without any > greeter, it's expected. > LightDM without autologin needs a greeter. So in this case you just get > a "fallback" session to avoid unnecesseraly breaking the user's > system. I choose not to bring lightdm-gtk-greeter's assets to give the > user a little push toward adding a greeter service. Ah, now I understand the comment in lightdm-profile-service. I think the default configuration should take care of all this. It seems problematic to me that users specify =E2=80=9Cgreeter-session=E2=80= =9D as a mere string, but the corresponding greeter may not even be installed. That=E2= =80=99s also what=E2=80=99s bothering me about the greeter search directories. Would it make sense to let =E2=80=9Cgreeter-session=E2=80=9D be a *package*= instead of a string? Then we could specify the lightdm-gtk-greeter package as the default and use its output directory as the lookup directory for greeters =E2=80=94 instead of the global system profile. I think this would be more elegant and reduce potential for misconfiguration. What do you think about this? > It's very arguable > so if you think we should bring in assets too, let's do it. I can > prepare a patch if you want. What do you mean by assets? Which package provides them? >> I also haven=E2=80=99t actually been able to log in as root with an empty >> password, which is what the VM generates by default. Can this be >> supported with lightdm? > > Didn't succeed either but it should be possible... :/ > Looking on the web, on passwordless login, the lightdm-autologin pam is > often cited so this line: > > (pam-entry (control "required") (module "pam_succeed_if.so") > (arguments (list "uid >=3D 1000"))) > > might be related. But I'm really not knowledgeable enough on this matter > to give a proper answer. I can take a look at this and the other PAM questions you had. -- Ricardo