Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
Coin, On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 16:07:39 +0100, Marc Dequènes (Duck) wrote: As you said you could not reproduce, i tested again with 0.5.0-2, and could not reproduce either (but with a machine in unstable and experimental xorg). So i'll try with a cleaner configuration (which is don't have access to at the moment) soon. I made the same tests on the other machine and was not able to reproduce either. I could not find anything related in deps'changelogs, but it's probably better not to loose more time on this issue, now that it works both after downgrading and out of the box with the Squeeze version, and close it. Thanks for your efforts. -- Marc Dequènes (Duck) pgpLjyysm3Fks.pgp Description: PGP Digital Signature
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertag 588276 squeeze-can-defer tag 588276 squeeze-ignore kthxbye On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 16:07:39 +0100, Marc Dequènes (Duck) wrote: > As you said you could not reproduce, i tested again with 0.5.0-2, > and could not reproduce either (but with a machine in unstable and > experimental xorg). So i'll try with a cleaner configuration (which > is don't have access to at the moment) soon. > Tagging as not a squeeze blocker. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
Quoting Simon McVittie : I do notice that 0.7.0 builds libnotify4, not libnotify1, so I assume you had to upgrade something else to use it; are you sure the fix couldn't have been in another package you upgraded? I remember upgrading libnotify-bin only, so as to test using notify-send and no other intermediate tool; and yes it drags libnotify4, but as it uses DBus to talk to the notification-daemon, and awesome (in my case) acts as notification-daemon without using this lib, it should not be that important. Awesome has not been updated since a while, and i don't know which dependency could have intefered. As you said you could not reproduce, i tested again with 0.5.0-2, and could not reproduce either (but with a machine in unstable and experimental xorg). So i'll try with a cleaner configuration (which is don't have access to at the moment) soon. Thanks for your investigation. -- Marc Dequènes (Duck) pgpROwH4oXHWP.pgp Description: PGP Digital Signature
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
On Sat, 08 Jan 2011 at 22:02:50 +, Simon McVittie wrote: > Looking through the git log from 0.5.0 to 0.7.0, nothing jumps out at me as > likely to fix this (unless someone fixed it by mistake / in passing while > porting to GDBus or something). I can't reproduce this in a squeeze VM with xfce4-notifyd 0.1.0-5, and notify-send from either libnotify-bin 0.5.0-2 or 0.7.0-3+b1 (which each link to the appropriate libnotify). S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 at 03:07:26 +0100, Marc Dequènes (Duck) wrote: > Quoting Julien Cristau : > >On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:46:51 +0100, Marc Dequènes wrote: > >>fixed 588276 0.7.0-2 > >Does this mean there is a known fix for this bug? > > Unfortunately not that i am aware of. I just saw the package in > experimental, and wondered if it was solving my problem, tested > again to see the problem still existed, and tried this version with > success just before leaving for X-mas time. Looking through the git log from 0.5.0 to 0.7.0, nothing jumps out at me as likely to fix this (unless someone fixed it by mistake / in passing while porting to GDBus or something). I do notice that 0.7.0 builds libnotify4, not libnotify1, so I assume you had to upgrade something else to use it; are you sure the fix couldn't have been in another package you upgraded? Thanks, S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
Coin, Quoting Julien Cristau : On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:46:51 +0100, Marc Dequènes wrote: fixed 588276 0.7.0-2 thanks Does this mean there is a known fix for this bug? Unfortunately not that i am aware of. I just saw the package in experimental, and wondered if it was solving my problem, tested again to see the problem still existed, and tried this version with success just before leaving for X-mas time. If you're asking, then i guess nothing in the upstream changelog says it should be solved. If you want to cherry pick the fix, i'll try to find some time to bisect. Happy post X-mas time. -- Marc Dequènes (Duck) pgp8VLfrEIiSF.pgp Description: PGP Digital Signature
Bug#588276: fixed 588276 in 0.7.0-2
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:46:51 +0100, Marc Dequènes wrote: > fixed 588276 0.7.0-2 > thanks > Does this mean there is a known fix for this bug? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
