sddm-0.13.0-3.fc22
copy all scripts into /etc/sddm as %%config(noreplace)
0.13.0
sddm-0.13.0-4.fc22
Updates may require up to 24 hours to propagate to mirrors. If the following command doesn't work, please retry later:
sudo dnf upgrade --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2015-0c4711f24d
Please log in to add feedback.
This update has been submitted for testing by rdieter.
rdieter edited this update.
Thanks for the update but it only works marginally better. Screen 2 is now fully graphical (nor more boot screen residue), but it's invariably just a copy of screen 1, with dialog- and mouse-sharing.
please only give -1 if the update is worse or regressive on some way
rdieter edited this update.
New build(s):
Removed build(s):
rdieter edited this update.
This update has been pushed to testing.
Ok, no more negative karma, but the problem reported in BZ 1282046 persists, even with 0.13.0-3.
@corinna: that doesn't sound directly sddm's fault, rather Xorg using clone mode by default.
@anonymous, so why does it reproducibly work correctly with sddm-0.10.0, just (differently) incorrectly with 0.12.0 and 0.13.0? It's as if the configured Xsetup file is ignored.
Are you sure your configured Xsetup file is referenced in your sddm.conf ? Note: recent sddm builds changed the default location of configurable files to /etc/sddm (rather than /usr/share/sddm/scripts, where modifications get lost on package updates)
rdieter edited this update.
New build(s):
Removed build(s):
This update has been submitted for testing by rdieter.
This update has been pushed to testing.
I was sure I replied to rdieter's question here, too, but I must have screwed up. I wrote a detailed reply to the question in the BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282046#c6
This update has reached 7 days in testing and can be pushed to stable now if the maintainer wishes
Works for me (singlemonitor). Since login with multimonitor seems to be functional, even if there is a optical issue with special theme setups, I think, this should be pushed stable.
karma: +1
rdieter edited this update.
This update has been submitted for stable by rdieter.
This release is still a regression from 0.10.0 which disallows to update, so I wonder why this is deemed stable. Shouldn't the bug be fixed first?
@corinna: Please consider the guidelines for proven testers. According to them, an introduced minor bug does not necessarily mean, the package is in unstable condition: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Dafrito/Proven_tester
This update has been pushed to stable.