GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 604526
Fails to prompt for password when user list is disabled (non "face-browser" mode)
Last modified: 2010-01-18 18:31:49 UTC
sudo -u gdm gconftool-2 --set /apps/gdm/simple-greeter/disable_user_list --type bool true (IE, a gdm which prompts for username, then password, presenting no user list)... login fails (it never prompts for a password). It prompts for a username, but then fails to prompt for a password. It appears to spawn a new X11 server after the username is entered though - which is jumping the gun a little. /var/log/auth.log contains this: Dec 11 02:37:42 pcjc2lap gdm-session-worker[22102]: pam_unix(gdm:auth): conversation failed Dec 11 02:37:42 pcjc2lap gdm-session-worker[22102]: pam_unix(gdm:auth): auth could not identify password for [pcjc2] Bug still present in 2.29.1
The "conversation failed" PAM message indicates that you perhaps have a problem with your pam configuration (/etc/pam.conf or /etc/pam.d files). This may not be a GDM issue.
I've also spotted in the logs.. looks like something DBus related is failing to start? (In /var/log/gdm/\:0-greeter.log) ** (process:2877): DEBUG: Greeter session pid=2877 display=:0.0 xauthority=/var/run/gdm/auth-for-gdm-Szu8Fs/database gdm-simple-greeter[2877]: WARNING: error opening connection: Failed to connect to socket /tmp/gdm-greeter-ZFMtWfYv: Connection refused gdm-simple-greeter[2877]: WARNING: Unable to start greeter session: Failed to connect to socket /tmp/gdm-greeter-ZFMtWfYv: Connection refused
This is on Ubuntu Lucid (development release), and I believe they ship different PAM configuration to what upstream GDM uses. I guess it might be worth trying the Ubuntu shipped ones though. What suggested to me "not PAM" was that it works if I do a face-brower login, so presumably the PAM stack is working OK for that. It looks to me like it is the same configuration being used.
the issue was likely due to the change on bug #572765 and fixed now with http://git.gnome.org/browse/gdm/commit/?id=51669cb03613b36b0b1798b1f8d2bba85b3e2a49, could somebody confirm using git or lucid which has a backport of the change?
Confirmed that the Ubuntu new package in Lucid fixes this issue for me. I'm marking this as RESOLVED FIXED now. Thanks! Peter C.