[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1052197: xrdp: after bullseye-security upgrade, empty turquoise screen after logging in



Hello,

the new Bullseye version of xrdp is identical to the version in Bookworm. Thus
the underlying problem is probably more complex and I don't suspect that
something is wrong with xrdp itself but more likely with a configuration option
or related software packages which do something different than in Bookworm.

I have tried to reproduce the problem on Bullseye with Gnome 3 installed. The
problem here is that gnome-remote-desktop appears to interfere with xrdp, so
I'm not totally sure what is caused by Gnome and what might be a bug in xrdp.
Then I restarted the session with Gnome in Xorg mode and a remote connection to
the xrdp server succeeded. However I got a black background instead of the
normal wallpaper I have. Applications were shown correctly though. 

I definitely need more information about your setup or xrdp in general to debug
this issue. Possible reasons for the behavior may be:

1. TLS / connection problem ? Did you do "adduser xrdp ssl-cert" ? Maybe a new
TLS configuration option in 0.9.21.1?

2. graphic drivers ? I read that hardware accelerated drivers may cause such
problems. Maybe try to disable them and use software rendering only?
LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE = true

Please also upload the following log files: 

/var/log/xrdp-sesman.log
/var/log/xrdp.log
~/.xsession-errors

and 

journalctl -S -2m 

or something similar may provide more information about error messages, etc.

~/.xorgxrdp.10.log seems to belong to xorgxrdp. The package is only recommended
but I wonder if the problem is potentially caused by it. xrdp is a build-
dependency which suggests it might need a rebuild? But on the other hand then
recommending the package would be wrong and it should be added to Depends.
Someone else would have stumbled upon this sooner I guess.

Regards,

Markus



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: