On dim., 2012-08-19 at 12:53 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > None of the above. It's a bug in lightdm, for shipping an upstart job with > no start condition. I have no idea why this is done; the upstart job used > in Ubuntu for lightdm doesn't look anything like this. > > Now, there's a good chance that "fixing" the lightdm upstart job to have a > correct start condition still won't work, because several of the > prerequisite events are not yet available at start time with the upstart in > Debian. I'm planning to fix this ASAP for wheezy, having spoken with Neil > McGovern at DebConf and gotten provisional release team sign-off, but it's > not absolutely certain this will go in or when. In the meantime, I believe > the correct fix is for the lightdm package to drop its upstart job.
Note that the upstart job is the upstream one, untouched, afaict. I can do the removal (pending RT upload) if it's the best way to do fix the bug. Regards, -- Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
