On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 11:41:01AM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 12:49:30PM -0500, Jay Kline wrote: > > Alexander Sack wrote: > > | I did not found any hints on this in the bug report, so maybe it's > > worth asking: > > | > > | You see any unexpected messages in dmesg or any system logs? Are there any > > | errors in /var/log/XFree86.0.log? > > > > No, nothing of the sort. However, I am starting to lean towrads > > libnss-ldap being the issue. Bug #302296
> Ahh, you didn't mention this! There is/was an ABI conflict between the two, > which would cause this. I can't find the bug atm, but this will be the > problem. > Either two libdbs, two libgnutls's, or something of that nature which then > causes the gdm process to segfault. Last time I followed up on it, the > maintainer of the conflicting package didn't want to change ABI before sarge, > so this combination just won't work. We are, thankfully, down to one gnutls, one gcrypt, and one sasl in sarge; and AFAIK libdbs have been fixed long ago not to conflict. There is still one outstanding issue in sarge with the fact that libldap2 currently provides both libldap.so.2 and libldap_r.so.2 with identical exported symbols, differing only in the claim that one is thread-safe. This is fixed in libldap2 2.1.30-7 in unstable by making one a symlink to the other, but bug #309485 is keeping this out of testing for the moment. Jay, taking care to run rm -f /usr/lib/libldap.so.2.0.15 before doing so, would you mind upgrading to the libldap2 from unstable to see if it fixes your problem? Cheers, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
