Re: Login failure after restart. Every time.
Colin Law
> I'm running 10.04 LTS on a Gateway laptop, and a new problem started
> showing up a month or so ago. I just got un-busy enough to ask about
> it.
>
> Every time I log in after a reboot, the gnome login fails the first
> time. It gets as far as playing the login sound, displays what could
> be a window of log messages for a fraction of a second, and goes back
> to asking for a login. The second attempt was always working until
> this morning, when I had to try three times. I hope it doesn't keep
> going up.
>
> Any idea how to figure this out?
You could look in syslog and auth.log to see if there are any clues there.
Is it possible you are starting typing the password too soon? Try
waiting a bit to see if it makes a difference.
Another possibility is that it is picking up a duff character at the
front for some reason, try hitting backspace a few times before
starting password.
Colin
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu...@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Basil Chupin
[pruned]
> Ubuntu is running in an ext4 partition which passes "fsck -f" completely.
I guess this was meant for me.
When you boot the system does the fsck check automatically. The above
does not really mean anything. I should have been more specific and said
to run the check MANUALLY at boot time.
My wife's computer was playing up similarly to what you are mentioning.
At boot up it also showed that fsck showed no problems. I wasn't
convinced. I ran e2fsck manually and it found a ton of errors. Which is
why I am suggesting that you run e2fsck manually. If it shows no
problems then you have not lost anything but gained a bit of knowledge
that the problem lies elsewhere. And when you run e2fsck do NOT use the
"-p" parameter.
BC
--
Wife sent me to the doctor to get the pills for me to have an erection.
When I came back I gave her the packet of slimming pills.
I am still looking for somewhere to live.
Kevin O'Gorman
> On 23/03/12 12:18, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>
> [pruned]
>
>
>> Ubuntu is running in an ext4 partition which passes "fsck -f" completely.
>
>
> I guess this was meant for me.
>
> When you boot the system does the fsck check automatically. The above does
> not really mean anything. I should have been more specific and said to run
> the check MANUALLY at boot time.
>
> My wife's computer was playing up similarly to what you are mentioning. At
> boot up it also showed that fsck showed no problems. I wasn't convinced. I
> ran e2fsck manually and it found a ton of errors. Which is why I am
> suggesting that you run e2fsck manually. If it shows no problems then you
> have not lost anything but gained a bit of knowledge that the problem lies
> elsewhere. And when you run e2fsck do NOT use the "-p" parameter.
>
>
> BC
I booted from a live disk and ran it manually. How else could I
insert the -f switch?
I'm not stupid enough to fsck a mounted disk, and it won't remount RO.
++ kevin
--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
Liam Proven
>
> I booted from a live disk and ran it manually. How else could I
> insert the -f switch?
> I'm not stupid enough to fsck a mounted disk, and it won't remount RO.
That should be absolutely fine.
However, for future reference, the way to get Linux to do an fsck on a
volume at boot-time is:
sudo touch /forcefsck
... and repeat this for all filesystems. (Not swap - that's not an FS.)
So if / was on one partition, say, sda1 but /home was on /sda5 and
swap on /sda6, you'd want to do:
sudo touch /home/forcefsck
... as well.
If the kernel finds a file called "forcefsck" in the root directory of
a FS as it mounts it, it runs `fsck -f` on it before mounting it. Then
it removes the file so it doesn't happen next time.
It's the equivalent of issuing:
chkdsk c: /f
on Windows and then replying "y" to the prompt to do it on the next restart.
--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpr...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpr...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884
Basil Chupin
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Basil Chupin<blch...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> On 23/03/12 12:18, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>>
>> [pruned]
>>
>>
>>> Ubuntu is running in an ext4 partition which passes "fsck -f" completely.
>>
>> I guess this was meant for me.
>>
>> When you boot the system does the fsck check automatically. The above does
>> not really mean anything. I should have been more specific and said to run
>> the check MANUALLY at boot time.
>>
>> My wife's computer was playing up similarly to what you are mentioning. At
>> boot up it also showed that fsck showed no problems. I wasn't convinced. I
>> ran e2fsck manually and it found a ton of errors. Which is why I am
>> suggesting that you run e2fsck manually. If it shows no problems then you
>> have not lost anything but gained a bit of knowledge that the problem lies
>> elsewhere. And when you run e2fsck do NOT use the "-p" parameter.
>>
>>
>> BC
> I booted from a live disk and ran it manually. How else could I
> insert the -f switch?
> I'm not stupid enough to fsck a mounted disk, and it won't remount RO.
>
> ++ kevin
I just checked 'man fsck' and there is no "-f" parameter/[switch] for fsck.
There is "-r" but no "-f".
BC
--
Wife sent me to the doctor to get the pills for me to have an erection.
When I came back I gave her the packet of slimming pills.
I am still looking for somewhere to live.
Ric Moore
>
> following which you can do either F7 or "init 5" and login into your
> operating system.
>
I didn't think we had those run levels with Debian?? Ric
--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
Colin Law
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Colin Law <cla...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 22 March 2012 21:38, Kevin O'Gorman <kogo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm running 10.04 LTS on a Gateway laptop, and a new problem started
>>> showing up a month or so ago. I just got un-busy enough to ask about
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Every time I log in after a reboot, the gnome login fails the first
>>> time. It gets as far as playing the login sound, displays what could
>>> be a window of log messages for a fraction of a second, and goes back
>>> to asking for a login. The second attempt was always working until
>>> this morning, when I had to try three times. I hope it doesn't keep
>>> going up.
>>>
>>> Any idea how to figure this out?
>>
>> You could look in syslog and auth.log to see if there are any clues there.
>
> few seconds later syslog shows pulseaudio failure of XOpenDisplay()
> and then failure to load module module-x11-publish with argument
> "display=:0.0". A "failsafe gnome" session fails, but a second
> normal attempt succeeds. An xterm session logs in the first time.
> Looks like a gnome problem of some kind,
Right so it is probably not the authentication that is failing, but
you are being logged straight back out due to an X error or something.
Anything in .xsession_errors? Maybe then a launchpad search and a
bit of googling for the errors.
Kevin O'Gorman
> On 03/23/2012 01:33 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>
>>
>> following which you can do either F7 or "init 5" and login into your
>> operating system.
>>
>
> I didn't think we had those run levels with Debian?? Ric
I didn't think so either, so I didn't try that. Without single-user
mode, I was unable to remount RO.
<peeve>Side note: even when that was possible, IIRC most systems
required you to log in as root. That's one of the places where
Ubuntu's no-root-pw policy gets you in trouble. That and any attempt
to fix things when booting fails. Try the recovery startups in GRUB
for instance.</peeve>
--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
--
Basil Chupin
> On 03/23/2012 01:33 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>
>> following which you can do either F7 or "init 5" and login into your
>> operating system.
>>
>
> I didn't think we had those run levels with Debian?? Ric
To start, my apologies for just writing "F7" because it really should be
CTRL-ALT-F7. Sorry about that (but your Mormon weddings-thingie
distracted me no end! :-D )
Re the second part re "init 5", because I am not able to include in
posts graphics I uploaded a scanned image of Run Levels which appear in
one of my reference books when I first started to dabble in Linux very
late 1990s. The image is here:
http://picpaste.com/run-levels-4nB15uBe.jpg
BC
--
Wife sent me to the doctor to get the pills for me to have an erection.
When I came back I gave her the packet of slimming pills.
I am still looking for somewhere to live.
Basil Chupin
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Ric Moore<waywa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 03/23/2012 01:33 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>>
>>> following which you can do either F7 or "init 5" and login into your
>>> operating system.
>>>
>> I didn't think we had those run levels with Debian?? Ric
> I didn't think so either, so I didn't try that. Without single-user
> mode, I was unable to remount RO.
Quote from Wikipedia:
Ubuntu
Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy Eft) and later contain Upstart as a replacement for
the traditional init-process, but they still use the traditional init
scripts and Upstart's SysV-rc compatibility tools to start most services
and emulate runlevels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Runlevels
> <peeve>Side note: even when that was possible, IIRC most systems
> required you to log in as root. That's one of the places where
> Ubuntu's no-root-pw policy gets you in trouble. That and any attempt
> to fix things when booting fails. Try the recovery startups in GRUB
> for instance.</peeve>
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/enable-and-disable-ubuntu-root-password.html
BC
--
Wife sent me to the doctor to get the pills for me to have an erection.
When I came back I gave her the packet of slimming pills.
I am still looking for somewhere to live.
Basil Chupin
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Basil Chupin<blch...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> I just checked 'man fsck' and there is no "-f" parameter/[switch] for fsck.
>>
>> There is "-r" but no "-f".
>>
>>
>> BC
> filesystem-specific options for your filesystem. Since the -f option
> is not recognized by fsck proper, it is passed on the the actual
> filesystem-specific executable. For most filesystems, it's a
> force-flag that makes fsck.??? do a full check.
I see.
What you are trying to say is that it is an undocumented "feature".
Kevin O'Gorman
> On 23/03/12 19:13, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Basil Chupin<blch...@iinet.net.au>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I just checked 'man fsck' and there is no "-f" parameter/[switch] for
>>> fsck.
>>>
>>> There is "-r" but no "-f".
>>>
>>>
>>> BC
>>
>> You have to read quite carefully to get it and be familiar with the
>> filesystem-specific options for your filesystem. Since the -f option
>> is not recognized by fsck proper, it is passed on the the actual
>> filesystem-specific executable. For most filesystems, it's a
>> force-flag that makes fsck.??? do a full check.
>
>
> I see.
>
> What you are trying to say is that it is an undocumented "feature".
I am not. Not at all.
From output of "man fsck":
fs-specific-options
Options which are not understood by fsck are
passed to the filesystem-specific checker.
These arguments must not take arguments, as there is no
way for fsck to be able to properly
guess which arguments take options and which don't.
Options and arguments which follow the -- are treated
as file system-specific options to be
passed to the file system-specific checker.
Please note that fsck is not designed to pass
arbitrarily complicated options to filesystem-
specific checkers. If you're doing something
complicated, please just execute the filesys‐
tem-specific checker directly. If you pass fsck some
horribly complicated option and argu‐
ments, and it doesn't do what you expect, don't bother
reporting it as a bug. You're almost
certainly doing something that you shouldn't be doing with fsck.
It seems to me that "-f" is simple enough. I've been using it since I
started with real AT&T SysV Unix at home around 1985, when there was
just one executable and only one filesystem.
From output of "man fsck.ext4" (/sbin/fsck.ext4, identical to /sbin/e2fsck):
-f Force checking even if the file system seems clean.
--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
--
Ric Moore
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Ric Moore<waywa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 03/23/2012 01:33 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> following which you can do either F7 or "init 5" and login into your
>>> operating system.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't think we had those run levels with Debian?? Ric
>
> I didn't think so either, so I didn't try that. Without single-user
> mode, I was unable to remount RO.
>
> <peeve>Side note: even when that was possible, IIRC most systems
> required you to log in as root. That's one of the places where
> Ubuntu's no-root-pw policy gets you in trouble. That and any attempt
> to fix things when booting fails. Try the recovery startups in GRUB
> for instance.</peeve>
Ah... the Good Ole Days. Reboot?? NEVER! It was an original sin that
windows types had to endure while we LAUGHED at them and pointed wagging
fingers. Now, WE do it.
wayward4now@iam:~$ uptime
00:05:58 up 1 day, 1:59, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.07, 0.06
wayward4now@iam:~$
I'm SO ashamed. <swears> Ric
--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
--
Mike Kupfer
> Right so it is probably not the authentication that is failing, but
> you are being logged straight back out due to an X error or something.
> Anything in .xsession_errors?
Yeah, I'd look in ~/.xsession_errors and /var/log/Xorg.0.log[.old].
Kevin, you may need to login from a failsafe session or an alternate tty
(e.g., ctrl-alt-F2) to look at .xsession_errors. At least on my 11.10
desktop, the .xsession_errors from the previous session is not saved.
mike
Kevin O'Gorman
> Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>
>> The Xorg logs are too big for this email list, so they are in pastebin:
>> http://pastebin.com/38syicdp is Xorg.0.log
>> http://pastebin.com/NgxzkSia is Xorg.0.log.old
>>
>> The .xsession_errors is below. There seem to be several things going
>> wrong, so I'm not sure which ones are caused by others.
>
> The messages in .xsession_errors all seem to be from applications
> complaining that the X server has died.
>
> And sure enough, your Xorg.0.log.old has
>
> Fatal server error:
> Failed to submit batchbuffer: No space left on device
>
> That's probably the thing to key off of for further research. Googling
> for "Failed to submit batchbuffer" shows many hits.
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1413061 explains what the
> message refers to, and it links to
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Troubleshooting/Freeze, which looks useful.
It would look more useful if I were actually experiencing a freeze.
I'm not. To repeat: when I reboot, the first X gnome login aborts
during the playing of the welcome sound, and takes me back to the
login screen. Almost always the subsequent identical login works
fine. Once I had to try three times, I think. All operations after
that are normal.
Judging from the help in the indicated thread, it may be time for a bug report.
--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
--