GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 723553
gdm crashing (assertions in gdbusconnection.c)
Last modified: 2014-02-13 15:37:43 UTC
Presently gdm doesn't start, I see various bits hitting assertion failures: Feb 03 19:27:47 qemux86-64 org.a11y.Bus[613]: GLib-GIO:ERROR:../../gio/gdbusconnection.c:6921:message_bus_get_singleton: code should not be reached Feb 03 19:27:47 qemux86-64 gnome-session[609]: GLib-GIO:ERROR:../../gio/gdbusconnection.c:6921:message_bus_get_singleton: code should not be reached
Doing: [daemon] AutomaticLoginEnable=true AutomaticLogin=walters in /etc/gdm/custom.conf gets me to a working UI - so this is something strange with the GDM login shell.
Ok, it looks like the bisection range starts with: good 0c65c092f374fdb42522b56a0078020412b2472e That makes feb6ddaff33a3e58a20e94264313322534963f98 highly likely to be the first bad commit.
This assertion is coming from dconf -- presumably a bug in the file-db backend that didn't show up until gdm started using it. I'll look into this.
Created attachment 268860 [details] [review] file-db: don't install match rules on no bus file-db databases don't have an associated D-Bus bus type, so don't try to install match rules for them.
Attachment 268860 [details] pushed as 431d112 - file-db: don't install match rules on no bus
*** Bug 723738 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Ok, I'm going to repurpose this bug. Now we have: Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: Gjs-Message: JS LOG: GNOME Shell started at Wed Feb 12 2014 21:52:15 GMT+0000 (GMT) Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: (gnome-shell:422): Gjs-WARNING **: JS ERROR: Exception in callback for signal: startup-prepared: Gio.DBusError: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.AccessDenied: No session available Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: LoginDialog<._init@resource:///org/gnome/shell/gdm/loginDialog.js:375 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: wrapper@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:169 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: _Base.prototype._construct@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:110 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: Class.prototype._construct/newClass@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:204 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: ScreenShield<._ensureUnlockDialog@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/screenShield.js:972 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: wrapper@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:169 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: ScreenShield<.showDialog@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/screenShield.js:918 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: wrapper@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:169 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: _initializeUI/<@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/main.js:208 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: _emit@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/signals.js:124 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: LayoutManager<._prepareStartupAnimation@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/layout.js:620 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: wrapper@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/lang.js:169 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: LayoutManager<._loadBackground/signalId<@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/layout.js:565 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: _emit@resource:///org/gnome/gjs/modules/signals.js:124 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: SystemBackground<._init/<.onFinished<@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/background.js:639 Feb 12 21:52:15 qemux86-64 gnome-session[391]: BackgroundCache<._loadImageContent/<@resource:///org/gnome/shell/ui/background.js:197
Do you believe this to be the same bug at all? I mean -- do you have any reason to suspect that this is dconf-related anymore?
The problems I have reported on in bug 723738 have disappeared.
(In reply to comment #9) > Do you believe this to be the same bug at all? I mean -- do you have any > reason to suspect that this is dconf-related anymore? Nope, let me take this back to gdm.
Tagging gdm back again now: https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-continuous/commit/?id=4f1ab7535eae98b3f78f2fbae2d11eff6dfe4020
...or we could have kept the dconf bug as a dconf bug and opened a new bug for the separate issue in gdm... (but not asking you to change it back again now)
(In reply to comment #13) > ...or we could have kept the dconf bug as a dconf bug and opened a new bug for > the separate issue in gdm... Yeah, sorry, I normally do that, this one just had historical context that is useful.
Fixed by https://git.gnome.org/browse/gdm/commit/?id=9539d0763f13dc9431ac014d80023e0c0109683e