On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:19:36PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Today, 13 hours, 42 minutes, 29 seconds ago, Jurij Smakov wrote: > > On Tue, 9 May 2006, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > > > >I should note that the above remark applied to 2.6.15, probably _before_ > > >running X. With 2.6.16-1 (from sid), I can observe the following funny > > >thing: > > > > > > # file /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libxaa.so > > > /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libxaa.so: Sun disk label 'ST39111A cyl 17660 alt 2 > > > hd 16 sec 63' 14285 phys cys, 51 alts/cyl, 0 blocks, boot block present > > > > > >With 2.6.15, it's now `libramdac.so' that gets broken: > > > > > > # file /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libramdac.so > > > /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libramdac.so: sparc executable > > > > > >This randomness may explain why we do not experience the same problems. > > > > Ugh. The only thing which comes to mind is that your kernel got > > miscompiled somehow. Dave Miller mentioned on sparclinux list that gcc 4.1 > > causes problems, perhaps you are using it to build the kernels? > > No, I'm running the Debian kernels from `unstable'. > > So the way X talks to the kernel/hardware must be quite unorthodox. > Maybe some DMA issue or something like that? > I'd rather look at the hardware. That kind of problem smells like ram chip or control gone berserk.
Seb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]