Re: Updated: xorg-server-1.9.2-1
On 09/11/2010 09:02, Fergus wrote: Fatal server error: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock Does /tmp/.X0-lock exists? Is it readable by you? Yes. Hmm. It's strange that the Xserver should choose to lie about that, then. The code in question really does just say... lfd = open(LockFile, O_RDONLY); if (lfd 0) { unlink(tmp); FatalError(Can't read lock file %s\n, LockFile); } ... so I can't see much room for unpredictability. It would be helpful if you could strace XWin to see why it gets this wrong. Have you tried manually removing the lock file /tmp/.X0-lock? Are you sure /tmp is getting mounted successfully where you expect it to be? Yes. Have you tried '-nolock', as suggested by [1] I hadn't then. But I have now and as a consequence everything is working perfectly. Thank you. (Over time I have occasionally had to moderate the syntax of both XWin and xterm command lines to go from working to failing and back again to working. This is just another example. On an earlier occasion, the recommended use of -nolock failed. I am just happy when the current usage works. Thanks again.) Well, I can't deny this might be your experience, but that's not how things are supposed to work :-) -- Jon TURNEY Volunteer Cygwin/X X Server maintainer -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: Updated: xorg-server-1.9.2-1
Fatal server error: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock Does /tmp/.X0-lock exists? Is it readable by you? Yes. Are you sure /tmp is getting mounted successfully where you expect it to be? Yes. Have you tried '-nolock', as suggested by [1] I hadn't then. But I have now and as a consequence everything is working perfectly. Thank you. (Over time I have occasionally had to moderate the syntax of both XWin and xterm command lines to go from working to failing and back again to working. This is just another example. On an earlier occasion, the recommended use of -nolock failed. I am just happy when the current usage works. Thanks again.) Fergus -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: Updated: xorg-server-1.9.2-1
Dear Jon, Since the update I have been unable to start XWin under [1.7]. Following my usual sequence at a bash prompt: mount n:/tmp /tmp # drive n: is NTFS as required run XWin -multiwindow Normally these two would be followed by a command line for xterm, but I am not getting that far! The second line repeatedly generates a Cygwin/X error message box, where the reason given is very familiar: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock I used to get this when /tmp was FAT32 but as you see from line 1 I am making an explicit mount to a NTFS drive, and in the recent past this step has been all that is necessary to make progress. When I open /var/log/xwin/XWin.0.log for more information I read ~ cat /var/log/xwin/XWin.0.log Welcome to the XWin X Server Vendor: The Cygwin/X Project Release: 1.9.2.0 (10902000) Build Date: 2010-11-03 XWin was started with the following command line: /usr/bin/XWin -multiwindow ddxProcessArgument - Initializing default screens winInitializeScreenDefaults - primary monitor w 1280 h 1024 winInitializeDefaultScreens - native DPI x 96 y 96 _XSERVTransSocketOpenCOTSServer: Unable to open socket for inet6 _XSERVTransOpen: transport open failed for inet6/mandible:0 _XSERVTransMakeAllCOTSServerListeners: failed to open listener for inet6 Fatal server error: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock [1]+ Donerun XWin -multiwindow Can anything be determined from the 3 lines in this file beginning _XSERV (Unable .. failed .. failed)? Do I need to change my command sequence? BTW it's interesting (is it?) that the error message refers to 1.9.2.0 not 1.9.2-1. I'm surprised that there are no other anguished reports to you following the update, but I guess that's because the fault/ problem/ difficulty is mine rather than general. ?? Any insights much appreciated. Thank you, Fergus PS It kills me not to copy this to cygwin at cygwin dot com which I feel will have a much wider readership and skill set amongst that readership, but anybody sinning in this regard is always referred straight to Cygwin-X. A strange separation of reporting. Not that I am doubting your specific capability, just the potential for Me Too amongst readers. (Or even Not Me, but I Know What's Going Wrong.) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: Updated: xorg-server-1.9.2-1
On 08/11/2010 11:48, Fergus wrote: Since the update I have been unable to start XWin under [1.7]. Following my usual sequence at a bash prompt: mount n:/tmp /tmp # drive n: is NTFS as required run XWin -multiwindow Normally these two would be followed by a command line for xterm, but I am not getting that far! The second line repeatedly generates a Cygwin/X error message box, where the reason given is very familiar: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock I used to get this when /tmp was FAT32 but as you see from line 1 I am making an explicit mount to a NTFS drive, and in the recent past this step has been all that is necessary to make progress. When I open /var/log/xwin/XWin.0.log for more information I read ~ cat /var/log/xwin/XWin.0.log Welcome to the XWin X Server Vendor: The Cygwin/X Project Release: 1.9.2.0 (10902000) Build Date: 2010-11-03 XWin was started with the following command line: /usr/bin/XWin -multiwindow ddxProcessArgument - Initializing default screens winInitializeScreenDefaults - primary monitor w 1280 h 1024 winInitializeDefaultScreens - native DPI x 96 y 96 _XSERVTransSocketOpenCOTSServer: Unable to open socket for inet6 _XSERVTransOpen: transport open failed for inet6/mandible:0 _XSERVTransMakeAllCOTSServerListeners: failed to open listener for inet6 Fatal server error: Can't read lock file /tmp/.X0-lock I don't think there have been any significant changes in the lockfile code since the previous version, so this is mysterious. Does /tmp/.X0-lock exists? Is it readable by you? ('ls -al /tmp/.X0-lock' ) Are you sure /tmp is getting mounted successfully where you expect it to be? Have you tried '-nolock', as suggested by [1] Can anything be determined from the 3 lines in this file beginning _XSERV (Unable .. failed .. failed)? Do I need to change my command sequence? The lines about inet6 are expected if you don't have IPv6 installed. If they have just started appearing with 1.9.2, that would be odd. BTW it's interesting (is it?) that the error message refers to 1.9.2.0 not 1.9.2-1. XWin only reports the upstream version (1.9.2.0), not our packaging version (the -1), for various uninteresting reasons. I'm surprised that there are no other anguished reports to you following the update, but I guess that's because the fault/ problem/ difficulty is mine rather than general. ?? Any insights much appreciated. Either that or you are the only person who uses XWin :-) I never hear from anyone saying it just works fine, so I assume they don't exist :-) [1] http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html#q-cant-read-lock-file -- Jon TURNEY Volunteer Cygwin/X X Server maintainer -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: Updated: xorg-server-1.9.2-1
On 11/8/2010 6:48 AM, Fergus wrote: PS It kills me not to copy this to cygwin at cygwin dot com which I feel will have a much wider readership and skill set amongst that readership, but anybody sinning in this regard is always referred straight to Cygwin-X. Because this is where those interested in Cygwin-X will be hanging out and looking for answers. For issues that are clearly X-related (or suspected to be so), it makes sense to query the list that supports that functionality, even if the readership is smaller than the main list. From the perspective of those with a problem, I would think there would be a preference for quality (of responses from this list) vs quantity (of eyes on some other list). And I'm sure those on the main list who aren't interested in X issues much prefer the lack of X traffic (and vice-versa). If you look in the email archives for discussions about merging the lists, you'll see these two points were well represented in the feedback, if my memory serves. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _ A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/