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

gdm login console keyboard settings are propagated to LUKS boot password prompt by initramfs-tools triggers



Hello, there.

I noticed a strange thing: I use LUKS to encrypt my system, so it asks
me the passphrase at boot. As a bépo (a French Dvorak-like keymap)
user, I configured it, using Gnome preferences panel, on the gdm login
screen, as the only available keymap.

I noticed that, when aptitude runs, for any reason, initramfs-tools
triggers, it fires the following errors:
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-3-amd64
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8107e-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8107e-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168h-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168h-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168g-3.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168g-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8106e-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8106e-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8411-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8411-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8402-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168f-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168f-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8105e-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-3.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168e-1.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168d-2.fw for
module r8169
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/rtl_nic/rtl8168d-1.fw for
module r8169
setupcon: The keyboard model is unknown, assuming 'pc105'. Keyboard may
be configured incorrectly.
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"
WARNING: Unknown X keysym "dead_greek"

The missing firmware messages are OK, as you would think, but setupcon and dead_greek stuff are something else. The dead_greek part hints for a relation with bépo, as this keymap is supposed to have a greek dead key, which allows to type Greek letters using the Latin equivalent. I say "supposed" as Debian does not support it yet.

The consequence (if not post hoc ergo propter hoc) of these messages appearing is that it makes the LUKS passphrase prompt to use bépo. Now I know it, it's not really a problem for typing the passphrase, but I really think this is a bug, as there was no clear warning about this side effect, neither from the triggers nor from Gnome Preferences. I used bépo under Jessie, but not for gdm3 login screen, and these bépo-related stuff never appeared, so I assume that it appeared as a consequence the use of bépo as the default keymap for gdm login screen.

I assume that the change of the default keymap for the gdm login screen is, in fact, a change of the keymap of the root user, and that, when the initramfs-tools triggers are fired, they propagate the new keymap to the LUKS prompt.

FWIW:
root@Aethelthryth /h/penegal# setxkbmap -print
xkb_keymap {
	xkb_keycodes  { include "evdev+aliases(azerty)"	};
	xkb_types     { include "complete"	};
	xkb_compat    { include "complete"	};
	xkb_symbols   { include "pc+fr(bepo)+fr(latin9):2+fr(oss):3+inet(evdev)"	};
	xkb_geometry  { include "pc(pc105)"	};
};

So, here are my questions:
 * is this behavior normal, or is there a bug as I assume?
 * am I right on the sequence of events?
 * which package should I report this against, if this is a bug?
 * do you need more data to tell?
 * should I post this on another, more appropriate Debian ML?

Awaiting your answers,

Regards.
-- 
David Guyot
Administrateur système / Sysadmin
Europe Camions Interactive / Stockway
Moulin Collot F-88500 Ambacourt
Tél : +33 (0)3 29 30 47 85

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


Reply to: