6:21 a.m.
Bonjour,
I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
authentication module
What does it mean and how to recover?
selinux is disabled.
Thank you.
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
7:39 a.m.
On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
authentication module
What does it mean and how to recover?
First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow file?
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
9:53 a.m.
Le 08/02/2018 à 14:39, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
> I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
> this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
>
> Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
> authentication module
>
> What does it mean and how to recover?
First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow file?
Certainly! She can login through ssh.
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
3:45 p.m.
On 02/08/18 23:53, François Patte wrote:
Le 08/02/2018 à 14:39, Ed Greshko a écrit :
> On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
>> I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
>> this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
>>
>> Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
>> authentication module
>>
>> What does it mean and how to recover?
>
> First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow file?
Certainly! She can login through ssh.
But is the user logging it via ssh using keys or a password?
Have you, as root, tried resetting the password?
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
1:33 a.m.
Le 08/02/2018 à 22:45, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/08/18 23:53, François Patte wrote:
> Le 08/02/2018 à 14:39, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>> On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
>>> I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
>>> this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
>>>
>>> Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
>>> authentication module
>>>
>>> What does it mean and how to recover?
>>
>> First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow file?
> Certainly! She can login through ssh.
But is the user logging it via ssh using keys or a password?
password
Have you, as root, tried resetting the password?
Yes I did
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
2 a.m.
On 02/09/18 15:33, François Patte wrote:
Le 08/02/2018 à 22:45, Ed Greshko a écrit :
> On 02/08/18 23:53, François Patte wrote:
>> Le 08/02/2018 à 14:39, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>> On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
>>>> I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
>>>> this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
>>>>
>>>> Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the underlying
>>>> authentication module
>>>>
>>>> What does it mean and how to recover?
>>> First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow file?
>> Certainly! She can login through ssh.
> But is the user logging it via ssh using keys or a password?
password
> Have you, as root, tried resetting the password?
Yes I did
OK....
How about you take note of the numeric UID and GID and then delete the user without
deleting their home directory. Then recreate the user with the same numeric UID and
GID but pointing to a new home directory. Then test. If the test is successful then
change the password file to point to the original home directory.
Oh, before that, what is the numeric UID and GID of the user? If it is less than
1000 it may cause issues.
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
8:13 a.m.
Le 09/02/2018 à 09:00, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/09/18 15:33, François Patte wrote:
> Le 08/02/2018 à 22:45, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>> On 02/08/18 23:53, François Patte wrote:
>>> Le 08/02/2018 à 14:39, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>>> On 02/08/18 20:21, François Patte wrote:
>>>>> I have problem with lightdm greeter: one user cannnot log-in: I have
>>>>> this message in /var/log/lightdm/lightdm.log:
>>>>>
>>>>> Authenticate result for user cath : User not known to the
underlying
>>>>> authentication module
>>>>>
>>>>> What does it mean and how to recover?
>>>> First thing to check. Does user cath have an entry in the /etc/shadow
file?
>>> Certainly! She can login through ssh.
>> But is the user logging it via ssh using keys or a password?
> password
>
>> Have you, as root, tried resetting the password?
> Yes I did
>
OK....
How about you take note of the numeric UID and GID and then delete the user without
deleting their home directory. Then recreate the user with the same numeric UID and
GID but pointing to a new home directory. Then test. If the test is successful then
change the password file to point to the original home directory.
Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what is
responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
Oh, before that, what is the numeric UID and GID of the user? If it is less than
1000 it may cause issues.
3000
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
8:33 a.m.
On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what
is
responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I only know
what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is causing the
problem.
At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in under lightdm or
finding out why they have been unable to?
> Oh, before that, what is the numeric UID and GID of the user? If it is less than
> 1000 it may cause issues.
> 3000
OK, so that isn't the issue.
So, have you attempted what I have proposed? Sometimes getting something to work is
more important than finding out why something doesn't work.
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
10:05 a.m.
Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what is
> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I only know
what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is causing the
problem.
Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't log!
At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in under lightdm or
finding out why they have been unable to?
I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
about lightdm!
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
11:46 a.m.
On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what is
>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>
> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I only know
> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is causing the
> problem.
Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't log!
>
> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in under lightdm
or
> finding out why they have been unable to?
I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
about lightdm!
Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop before
where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
originally installed way back when) but the current version was
libcrypto.so.10.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2:12 a.m.
Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what is
>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>
>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I only
know
>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is causing
the
>> problem.
>
> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't log!
>
>>
>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in under
lightdm or
>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>
> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>
> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
> about lightdm!
Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop before
where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
originally installed way back when) but the current version was
libcrypto.so.10.
In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
2:32 a.m.
On 02/10/18 16:12, François Patte wrote:
Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
> On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
>> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what is
>>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
>>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is this
>>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I
only know
>>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is
causing the
>>> problem.
>> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
>> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't log!
>>
>>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in under
lightdm or
>>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
>> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
>> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>>
>> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
>> about lightdm!
> Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
> version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop before
> where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
> originally installed way back when) but the current version was
> libcrypto.so.10.
In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
Would you consider to try another DM?
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
2:42 a.m.
Le 10/02/2018 à 09:32, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/10/18 16:12, François Patte wrote:
> Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
>> On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows what
is
>>>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath :
>>>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is
this
>>>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and since I
only know
>>>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what is
causing the
>>>> problem.
>>> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
>>> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't
log!
>>>
>>>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in
under lightdm or
>>>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>>> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
>>> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
>>> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>>>
>>> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
>>> about lightdm!
>> Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
>> version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop before
>> where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
>> originally installed way back when) but the current version was
>> libcrypto.so.10.
> In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
>
>
Would you consider to try another DM?
DM?
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
2:55 a.m.
On 02/10/18 16:42, François Patte wrote:
Le 10/02/2018 à 09:32, Ed Greshko a écrit :
> On 02/10/18 16:12, François Patte wrote:
>> Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
>>> On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
>>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>>>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>>>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody knows
what is
>>>>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user cath
:
>>>>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What is
this
>>>>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>>>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and
since I only know
>>>>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure what
is causing the
>>>>> problem.
>>>> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
>>>> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user can't
log!
>>>>
>>>>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged in
under lightdm or
>>>>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>>>> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been done
>>>> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve the
>>>> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>>>>
>>>> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap.... Nothing
>>>> about lightdm!
>>> Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
>>> version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop
before
>>> where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
>>> originally installed way back when) but the current version was
>>> libcrypto.so.10.
>> In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
>>
>>
> Would you consider to try another DM?
DM?
light(dm) dm=Display Manager
You could try sddm, kdm, or gdm?
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
11:10 a.m.
New subject: lightdm authentication failure for one user [more info]
Le 10/02/2018 à 09:55, Ed Greshko a écrit :
On 02/10/18 16:42, François Patte wrote:
> Le 10/02/2018 à 09:32, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>> On 02/10/18 16:12, François Patte wrote:
>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
>>>> On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
>>>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>>>>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>>>>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem! Nobody
knows what is
>>>>>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for user
cath :
>>>>>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)? What
is this
>>>>>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>>>>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your query and
since I only know
>>>>>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for sure
what is causing the
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has been
>>>>> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user
can't log!
>>>>>
>>>>>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user logged
in under lightdm or
>>>>>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>>>>> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has been
done
>>>>> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to solve
the
>>>>> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>>>>>
>>>>> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap....
Nothing
>>>>> about lightdm!
>>>> Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt (e.g. the
>>>> version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a laptop
before
>>>> where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
>>>> originally installed way back when) but the current version was
>>>> libcrypto.so.10.
>>> In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
>>>
>>>
>> Would you consider to try another DM?
> DM?
>
light(dm) dm=Display Manager
You could try sddm, kdm, or gdm?
I don't want to do that: I dislike gnome or kde and do not want to
introduce a lot of dependancies....
I solved the problem but I am still wondering why this issue hapenned:
lightdm uses accountservice and for other users there is file
/var/lib/AccountsService/users/user-name
which seems to has been created by adduser when their account was created.
Why, for this particular user this file was not created, I don't know! I
deleted and recreated the account but this file was not created and I
had to do it manually....
This file is very simple and contains:
[User]
Language=fr_FR.utf8
XSession=xfce
SystemAccount=false
That's all!
Now, if anybody has a clue, I will have better nights!
Thank you.
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
12:11 p.m.
New subject: lightdm authentication failure for one user [more info]
On 12 February 2018 at 13:10, François Patte <
francois.patte(a)mi.parisdescartes.fr> wrote:
Le 10/02/2018 à 09:55, Ed Greshko a écrit :
> On 02/10/18 16:42, François Patte wrote:
>> Le 10/02/2018 à 09:32, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>> On 02/10/18 16:12, François Patte wrote:
>>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 18:46, Rick Stevens a écrit :
>>>>> On 02/09/2018 08:05 AM, François Patte wrote:
>>>>>> Le 09/02/2018 à 15:33, Ed Greshko a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 02/09/18 22:13, François Patte wrote:
>>>>>>>> Seems to be an empirical way to solve the problem!
Nobody knows
what is
>>>>>>>> responsible for such a message (Authenticate result for
user
cath :
>>>>>>>> User not known to the underlying authentication module)?
What is
this
>>>>>>>> module and how to inform it that a new user was added?
>>>>>>> Well, since I am the only one who has responded to your
query and
since I only know
>>>>>>> what I have found by using google, I guess nobody knows for
sure
what is causing the
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>> Trying your trick gives the same result: once the password has
been
>>>>>> given, lightdm behaves like if it was a wrong password and user
can't log!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At this point are you more interested in getting that user
logged
in under lightdm or
>>>>>>> finding out why they have been unable to?
>>>>>> I am interested in both, it is quite boring that something has
been
done
>>>>>> somewhere and messages in log files are not enough explicit to
solve the
>>>>>> problem.... This tends to make the system more secretive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I googled too, and find some answer related to pam, to ldap....
Nothing
>>>>>> about lightdm!
>>>>> Please check the system logs. It may be an issue with libcrypt
(e.g.
the
>>>>> version desired isn't there). I've had that issue with a
laptop
before
>>>>> where the PAM system wanted libcrypto.so.6 (which was what was
>>>>> originally installed way back when) but the current version was
>>>>> libcrypto.so.10.
>>>> In that case wouldn't be impossible to login for all users?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Would you consider to try another DM?
>> DM?
>>
> light(dm) dm=Display Manager
>
> You could try sddm, kdm, or gdm?
I don't want to do that: I dislike gnome or kde and do not want to
introduce a lot of dependancies....
I solved the problem but I am still wondering why this issue hapenned:
lightdm uses accountservice and for other users there is file
/var/lib/AccountsService/users/user-name
which seems to has been created by adduser when their account was created.
Why, for this particular user this file was not created, I don't know! I
deleted and recreated the account but this file was not created and I
had to do it manually....
This file is very simple and contains:
[User]
Language=fr_FR.utf8
XSession=xfce
SystemAccount=false
That's all!
Now, if anybody has a clue, I will have better nights!
Have you seen
https://askubuntu.com/questions/139412/enabling-a-user-created-with-addus...
?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/lightdm/+bug/1019314 indicates that lightdm
switched
to using PAM via accountservice for user prefs in 2012, causing issues
for scripts that were storing user prefs to ~/.dmrc.
4 years is about long enough for someone to have forgotten that lightdm has
to be
handled differently. Many systems have multiple ways to add a user
(different GUI's
as well as `adduser` versus `useradd`). Is it possible that a different
tool was used
for the problem user? If not, perhaps something different in that user's
configuration
caused the tool to use a different logic path and encounter a bug -- either
never patched
in 2012-2013 or recently introduced.
Thank you.
--
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)6 7892 5822
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
George N. White III
2:55 p.m.
New subject: lightdm authentication failure for one user [more info]
On 02/13/18 01:10, François Patte wrote:
> light(dm) dm=Display Manager
>
> You could try sddm, kdm, or gdm?
I don't want to do that: I dislike gnome or kde and do not want to
introduce a lot of dependancies....
For future reference....
This is what one gets from adding sddm to a pure GNOME system.
[egreshko@f27gq ~]$ sudo dnf install sddm
[sudo] password for egreshko:
Last metadata expiration check: 1:18:21 ago on Tue 13 Feb 2018 03:31:03 AM CST.
Dependencies resolved.
===================================================================================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
===================================================================================
Installing:
sddm x86_64 0.15.0-1.fc27 fedora 611 k
Installing dependencies:
desktop-backgrounds-compat noarch 27.0.0-1.fc27 fedora 18 k
Transaction Summary
===================================================================================
Install 2 Packages
Total download size: 629 k
Installed size: 1.5 M
Is this ok [y/N]: N
Operation aborted.
So, not a whole lot of dependencies.
Plus, dnf has the "erase" function. Therefore, in the case of troubleshooting
you
can erase what you've installed to remove unneeded/unwanted packages.
I solved the problem but I am still wondering why this issue hapenned:
Good.
--
A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out
3 p.m.
New subject: lightdm authentication failure for one user [more info]
On 02/12/2018 12:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Plus, dnf has the "erase" function. Therefore, in the case
of troubleshooting you
can erase what you've installed to remove unneeded/unwanted packages.
You can also use the history function to get the transaction number and
undo it.
2290
days inactive
2294
days old
17 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Ed Greshko -
Ed Greshko -
François Patte -
George N. White III -
Joe Zeff -
Rick Stevens