stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The patch should allow strip to do it's job for all packages on every arch but Alpha, so it's safe (this has been tested with every revision thusfar, so it's still needed). Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just trying to protect myself from the Policy Nazis. I think the authors of the ELF loader for XFree86 would be very interested to know about this bug. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | // // // / / [EMAIL PROTECTED] | EI 'AANIIGOO 'AHOOT'E http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | PGP signature
[dog@dog.net.uk: xfree86 4.0.1-10]
This is becoming a big time FAQ. Between 4.0.1-6 and 4.0.1-9 (inclusive), the X server wrapper was broken such that it would always use a security level of "Console", irrespective of what was set in /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config. Also, I think at some point there was debconf confusion that caused "rootonly" to get written to that file even if the user picked something else. The short answer: dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common Finally, /etc/X11/Xserver is dead, dead, dead and not used for anything anymore. - Forwarded message from dog [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: dog [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: xfree86 4.0.1-10 Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:02:54 + Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i Organization: the kennel X-URL: http://www.dog.net.uk X-PGP: http://www.dog.net.uk/pgp X-Spam-Zero-Tolerance: you have been warned hi branden, upgrading from 4.0.1-8 to 4.0.1-10 i started having a problem running X as anything but root (user not authorised to run the X server). i've hacked around this temporarily by making /usr/X11R6/bin/X a symlink to XFree86 and XFree86 setuid root, but obviously this is not ideal. are users supposed to be members of some new group? -- dog - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|I must despise the world which does not Debian GNU/Linux |know that music is a higher revelation [EMAIL PROTECTED] |than all wisdom and philosophy. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |-- Ludwig van Beethoven PGP signature
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1 builds revisited]
Branden Robinson wrote: I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth. Can anyone else help him? - Forwarded message from Daryl Moulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] - I also have a 7200/120. Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote: On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The patch should allow strip to do it's job for all packages on every arch but Alpha, so it's safe (this has been tested with every revision thusfar, so it's still needed). Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just trying to protect myself from the Policy Nazis. I think the authors of the ELF loader for XFree86 would be very interested to know about this bug. I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves wether or not to pass -s to install? The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the symbol relocation information which is required for loading. It is probably OK to strip out some other stuff like debugging info. I just peeked at the config file, and I don't see where -s is getting set. Is this a patch to another patch? Has the default behavior of install changed? Should I just wait for the coffee to kick in and then all this will make sense? Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office 5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072 voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630 fax: 954.938.1982 SkyTel: 800.405.3401 http://www.metrolink.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Major texturing bugs in G400 DRI driver
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote: I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the Debian build anyway. Basically, texturing on the G400 DRI driver is completely borked up in that it seems that texture coordinates aren't getting to the card properly. I have some screenshots comparing the G400 driver with software Mesa at http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/temp/texture-hw.jpg (G400 driver) http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/temp/texture-sw.jpg (software) Basically, vertices which are a certain distance from the camera and are within the clipping planes seem to get their texture coordinates shoved to 0,0. As the camera moves around the broken texture coordinates change quite a bit. Has anyone else been having problems like these? This seems like the sort of thing that the DRI project wouldn't miss noticing before making a release. Or are the Debian packages still built from CVS? I have noticed texture-coordinate problems, but I don't know if it's the same thing. What I have noticed is that when a polygon loses a vertex as that vertex crosses the edge of the viewport, the polygon to which that vertex belongs suddenly has its texture mapped incorrectly. -- Thomas E. Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] CIMMS/NSSL, Norman, OK, USA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 11:12:48AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote: I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves wether or not to pass -s to install? The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the symbol relocation information which is required for loading. It is probably OK to strip out some other stuff like debugging info. I just peeked at the config file, and I don't see where -s is getting set. Is this a patch to another patch? Has the default behavior of install changed? Should I just wait for the coffee to kick in and then all this will make sense? Not really...it's not -s that's the problem, it's dh_strip. In the patch, I placed an ifeq in the rules file that made it so that, on Alpha, dh_strip is called with '-Nxserver-xfree86', but on other archs, it isn't. Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging. I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they be stripped out when the package is generated. My completely uneducated guess is that something in module loader "knows" that debugging symbols are enabled and depends on this, so that when later this same code is run stripped, it becomes confused? -- G. Branden Robinson| We either learn from history or, Debian GNU/Linux | uh, well, something bad will happen. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Bob Church http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | PGP signature
Re: Major texturing bugs in G400 DRI driver
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 09:54:20AM -0600, Thomas E. Vaughan wrote: On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote: I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the Debian build anyway. Basically, texturing on the G400 DRI driver is completely borked up in that it seems that texture coordinates aren't getting to the card properly. I have some screenshots comparing the G400 driver with software Mesa at http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/temp/texture-hw.jpg (G400 driver) http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/temp/texture-sw.jpg (software) Basically, vertices which are a certain distance from the camera and are within the clipping planes seem to get their texture coordinates shoved to 0,0. As the camera moves around the broken texture coordinates change quite a bit. Has anyone else been having problems like these? This seems like the sort of thing that the DRI project wouldn't miss noticing before making a release. Or are the Debian packages still built from CVS? I have noticed texture-coordinate problems, but I don't know if it's the same thing. What I have noticed is that when a polygon loses a vertex as that vertex crosses the edge of the viewport, the polygon to which that vertex belongs suddenly has its texture mapped incorrectly. Yeah, that's probably the same behavior, based on some of the stuff I've been observing. The texture used in that screenshot made it hard to tell, but when I used a checkerboard texture I noticed that it looked more like texture coordinates were being dropped or something, like you've observed... the reason all of the polygons are getting messed up in my renderer is because everything's sent as strips, and it seems that the entire strip gets borked. -- Joshua Shagam /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / No HTML/RTF in email www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam X No Word docs in email mp3.com/fluffyporcupine/ \ Respect for open standards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging.
I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they
be stripped out when the package is generated.
My completely uneducated guess is that something in module loader "knows"
that debugging symbols are enabled and depends on this, so that when later
this same code is run stripped, it becomes confused?
Just as a note...
I don't know how other rpm based distributions did it, but in the rpms
I built, what I did was this:
%define __os_install_post %{___build_post}
in the top of the spec file, so that rpm post scripts will not insist in
strip everything.
and added this to the bottom of the %install
(set +x; strip %{buildroot}%{prefix}/bin/* || :)
(set +x; strip %{buildroot}%{prefix}/lib/lib*.so* || :)
--
G. Branden Robinson| We either learn from history or,
Debian GNU/Linux | uh, well, something bad will happen.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Bob Church
http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
Paulo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 01:25:40PM -0500, Stuart Anderson wrote: Where is dh_strip invoked? I don't see it in the XFree86 config files, so I'll assume it is run as part of te packagin process. Yes. It is run as part of the debian/rules makefile, which wraps the XFree86 make World and make install rules. Can it be told to removing debugging section, but leave the regular symbols alone, or does the policy require that all symbols be removed? Here's the relevant quote. Note that by default all installed binaries should be stripped, either by using the -s flag to install, or by calling strip on the binaries after they have been copied into debian/tmp but before the tree is made into a package. We know how to turn off stripping for Alpha, that's not the problem. The problem is why the loader is choking on stripped modules. We don't know. -- G. Branden Robinson|The errors of great men are venerable Debian GNU/Linux |because they are more fruitful than the [EMAIL PROTECTED] |truths of little men. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |-- Friedrich Nietzsche PGP signature
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote: We know how to turn off stripping for Alpha, that's not the problem. The problem is why the loader is choking on stripped modules. We don't know. This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They have a .dynsym section which is still there even if the object gets stripped. What is the error message when it chokes? It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others. Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha x86 versions of the same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office 5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072 voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630 fax: 954.938.1982 SkyTel: 800.405.3401 http://www.metrolink.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: the continuing adventures of XFree86 4.0.1
"Christian T. Steigies" wrote: 'nother problem (after hand fixing the config): [...] (II) Loader running on linux (II) LoadModule: "bitmap" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a (II) Module XFree86 Font Renderer: vendor="XFree86 Font Renderer" compiled for 4.0.1g, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: XFree86 Font Renderer ABI class: XFree86 Font Renderer, version 0.2 (II) Loading font (null) (II) LoadModule: "pcidata" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libpcidata.a (II) Fatal server error: Caught signal 11. Server aborting I have no PCI bus, I don't see PCI mentioned in the config file, is there a way to stop loading that? Have you worked on the PCI code now? On PPC it also works without PCI, and I think it also loads that module, not sure though (I could ask on the APUS lists if you'd like). Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[jdfool@Club-internet.fr: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01]
Not NEARLY enough information. - Forwarded message from Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01 Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:25:19 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.15 i586) X-Accept-Language: en Hi, i tried to upgrade my standard potato box with Xfree4.01, but it seems to break all my xlib6-dependant packages, even if i try to install the xlib6 pseudo-package. Is there a FAQ or a doc to help acomplish this ? Is there an order to smooth update ? Many, many thanks in advance, Best regards, Emmanuel. - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| You should try building some of the Debian GNU/Linux | stuff in main that is modern...turning [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on -Wall is like turning on the pain. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | -- James Troup PGP signature
Re: [jdfool@Club-internet.fr: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01]
Emmanuel, Please do NOT bug Branden with mails about the X packages. Send questions to the mailing list. Did you try upgrading with the XFree86 4.0.1 packages from woody? These will definitely pose problems on a potato system. Try adding the following lines to your /etc/apt/sources.list and then upgrade your X: deb http://people.debian.org/%7Ecpbotha/ xf401_potato/i386/ deb http://people.debian.org/%7Ecpbotha/ xf401_potato/all/ These are Branden's 4.0.1 packages that have been rebuilt on a potato system. They install with little or no problems on my potato boxen. On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 05:44:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: Not NEARLY enough information. - Forwarded message from Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01 Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:25:19 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.15 i586) X-Accept-Language: en Hi, i tried to upgrade my standard potato box with Xfree4.01, but it seems to break all my xlib6-dependant packages, even if i try to install the xlib6 pseudo-package. Is there a FAQ or a doc to help acomplish this ? Is there an order to smooth update ? Many, many thanks in advance, Best regards, Emmanuel. - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| You should try building some of the Debian GNU/Linux | stuff in main that is modern...turning [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on -Wall is like turning on the pain. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | -- James Troup -- charl p. botha | computer graphics and cad/cam http://cpbotha.net/ | http://www.cg.its.tudelft.nl/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[branden@deadbeast.net: [jdfool@Club-internet.fr: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01]]
Sure there is Branden; Emmanuel, 4.0.1 is *not* for potato. If you want to run 4.0.1 on potato, please search for Charl P. Botha's packages built for potato. If things break, recognize that is because 4.0.1 was *never meant* for potato. If it works, then it is magic. If it breaks, that is to be expected. Best of luck. :) - Forwarded message from Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Envelope-to: sarnold@localhost Delivery-date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:45:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:41:27 -0800 (PST) X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 17:44:00 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01] Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Branden Robinson) Resent-Message-ID: Cf3uE.A.OwD.1KBM6@murphy Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailing-List: [EMAIL PROTECTED] archive/latest/1858 X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: list Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Bcc: Not NEARLY enough information. - Forwarded message from Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Emmanuel Merliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01 Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:25:19 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.15 i586) X-Accept-Language: en Hi, i tried to upgrade my standard potato box with Xfree4.01, but it seems to break all my xlib6-dependant packages, even if i try to install the xlib6 pseudo-package. Is there a FAQ or a doc to help acomplish this ? Is there an order to smooth update ? Many, many thanks in advance, Best regards, Emmanuel. - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| You should try building some of the Debian GNU/Linux | stuff in main that is modern...turning [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on -Wall is like turning on the pain. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | -- James Troup - End forwarded message - -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1buildsrevisited]
Michel Dnzer wrote: Branden Robinson wrote: > > I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't > been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM > so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth. > > Can anyone else help him? > > - Forwarded message from Daryl Moulder [EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > I also have a 7200/120. > > Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a > 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. It works ok on xf3 but not xf4 which is why I suspected there may be a bug somewhere:( Daryl Moulder -- - When everything is not as square as it may seem.
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1buildsrevisited]
Daryl Moulder wrote: Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) It works ok on xf3 but not xf4 which is why I suspected there may be a bug somewhere:( Yes, unfortunately... this is with the latest debs, right? Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1buildsrevisited]
* Michel D?nzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001207 15:55]: Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024x756 really a normal resolution on your platform? Most folks have a 1024x768 display, but not a 1024x756. shrug -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
authorized users [rfe]
Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but self-documenting config files are nice :). Thanks :) -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPCXFree864.0.1buildsrevisited]
Seth Arnold wrote: * Michel D?nzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]: > > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my > > default 1024x756 which was the problem. > Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024x756 really a normal resolution on your platform? Most folks have a 1024x768 display, but not a 1024x756. Oops typo I meant 1074x768 thanks for correcting that:) I havn't tried different colour depths yet I'll give it a go tonight and see what happens. I am using the latest debs, is there a problem with these deb files? Daryl Moulder -- - When everything is not as square as it may seem.
Re: r128 driver still borked in XF4.0.1-9pre10
Michael Flaig wrote: Is there a reason you use the GPM repeater device? GPM supports multiple input devices so the trackpad and the usb mouse works at the same time ... The new input layer does that for you as well in the form of /dev/input/mice . hey, cool! Where can I find documentation to get this to work. A Google search reveals this for example: http://home.munich.netsurf.de/Franz.Sirl/inputppc.html Does XF4 work on your Pismo now ? No, not the -8 packages. Waiting for new ones... Have you downloaded the xfree4 from deb http://people.debian.org/~branden/ woody/powerpc/ they are now -10 ... Well, I would have if they were still there... The only file in the powerpc directory is currently Packages.gz . the bug of -8 packages is fixed but now the packages hang my pismo which is my biggest problem at all. I have the same problem on my Pismo. That is, actually the screen isn't black for me but has an interesting gradient which slowly changes it's color and brightness :) The machine is dead as can be. The strange thing is: The same happens if I take the r128_drv.o from one of my build trees, which work as a whole. So the problem doesn't seem to be just in the driver. Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10 a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now only root is permitted to startx. The second line of /etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody but still no change. When I backed out of the update back to the version 4.0.1-9 packages Xfree86 began working for non root accounts again. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
Hello- Yes, I've the same problem when using startx. Logging in through xdm works, though. -Dave Barnett On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Kyle Sallee wrote: After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10 a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now only root is permitted to startx. The second line of /etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody but still no change. When I backed out of the update back to the version 4.0.1-9 packages Xfree86 began working for non root accounts again. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[wsheets@att.net: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).]
- Forwarded message from Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common). Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: none X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99] Message-Id: 00120720095300.1@k7 Hi Branden, With yesterday's update of xserver-common_4.01-10_i386 I can no longer run X with startx, which I always do. It yields the error message "X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting." I have narrrowed the change down to the one file /usr/X11R6/bin/X which is packaged in xserver-common. If I replace that one file with the previous version (4.01-9) the error goes away. Is this a deliberate change in authentication policy or just a bug? If it is deliberate I need to know how to do the authentication properly. Thanks for sharing your time and hard work with all of us out here! Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|A great work of art has never caused any Debian GNU/Linux |social problems. Social problems are [EMAIL PROTECTED] |caused by those trying to protect http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |society from great works of art. PGP signature
Re: authorized users [rfe]
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 04:13:04PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but self-documenting config files are nice :). No, because it would make my parser too complicated. I will, however, write a manpage for the file when I get around to it. -- G. Branden Robinson |You live and learn. Debian GNU/Linux|Or you don't live long. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Robert Heinlein http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | PGP signature
Re: [wsheets@att.net: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).]
[branden, you *need* to change the maintainer address to debian-x -- this is getting nuts. :] Walter: the /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config file needs to be updated. Change `root' to read `console' or `everyone' (or `everybody'?). * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001207 20:20]: - Forwarded message from Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common). Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: none X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99] Message-Id: 00120720095300.1@k7 Hi Branden, With yesterday's update of xserver-common_4.01-10_i386 I can no longer run X with startx, which I always do. It yields the error message "X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting." I have narrrowed the change down to the one file /usr/X11R6/bin/X which is packaged in xserver-common. If I replace that one file with the previous version (4.01-9) the error goes away. Is this a deliberate change in authentication policy or just a bug? If it is deliberate I need to know how to do the authentication properly. Thanks for sharing your time and hard work with all of us out here! Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|A great work of art has never caused any Debian GNU/Linux |social problems. Social problems are [EMAIL PROTECTED] |caused by those trying to protect http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |society from great works of art. -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote: It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others. Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha x86 versions of the same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences. While I've got you here, I've run into a problem with X -configure segfaulting in the s3virge driver. I haven't checked it lately (meaning in the past three weeks), so it might be fixed already (I'll check again tomorrow), but I wanted to see if you had heard of anything like this... C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to start X during bootup as user
Hi! I'm trying to run X from an init script during boot up like this: #!/bin/bash while true; do su - kiosk -c /usr/X11R6/bin/startx done Starting this manually as root works as expected. While booting I get: X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting. var: allowed_users, value: rootonly. var: nice_value, value: -10. Changing from rootonly to anybody makes no difference. Ok - that's no login shell from there, but... Thanks in advance, -Cajus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: the continuing adventures of XFree86 4.0.1
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote: [Please follow-up to debian-x if you want me to see it.] 4.0.1-10 is in the archive for i386, sparc, and powerpc. John Goerzen is building for alpha. Compiles for m68k and arm are still needed. Is John building them? I thought I was! :-) If he is, I need to fill him in on a few things... A prerelease of -11, based on the new upstream beta 4.0.1h, is available at the X Strike Force repository. Alpha, ARM, and m68k folks should grab these sources, build, and let me know what changes need to be made to the debian/*.$(ARCH) files. The changelog summarizes what changed on i386. Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The patch should allow strip to do it's job for all packages on every arch but Alpha, so it's safe (this has been tested with every revision thusfar, so it's still needed). C
stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The patch should allow strip to do it's job for all packages on every arch but Alpha, so it's safe (this has been tested with every revision thusfar, so it's still needed). Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just trying to protect myself from the Policy Nazis. I think the authors of the ELF loader for XFree86 would be very interested to know about this bug. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | // // // / / [EMAIL PROTECTED] | EI 'AANIIGOO 'AHOOT'E http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | pgpc8s9EbxTYC.pgp Description: PGP signature
[dog@dog.net.uk: xfree86 4.0.1-10]
This is becoming a big time FAQ. Between 4.0.1-6 and 4.0.1-9 (inclusive), the X server wrapper was broken such that it would always use a security level of Console, irrespective of what was set in /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config. Also, I think at some point there was debconf confusion that caused rootonly to get written to that file even if the user picked something else. The short answer: dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common Finally, /etc/X11/Xserver is dead, dead, dead and not used for anything anymore. - Forwarded message from dog [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: dog [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: xfree86 4.0.1-10 Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:02:54 + Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i Organization: the kennel X-URL: http://www.dog.net.uk X-PGP: http://www.dog.net.uk/pgp X-Spam-Zero-Tolerance: you have been warned hi branden, upgrading from 4.0.1-8 to 4.0.1-10 i started having a problem running X as anything but root (user not authorised to run the X server). i've hacked around this temporarily by making /usr/X11R6/bin/X a symlink to XFree86 and XFree86 setuid root, but obviously this is not ideal. are users supposed to be members of some new group? -- dog - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|I must despise the world which does not Debian GNU/Linux |know that music is a higher revelation [EMAIL PROTECTED] |than all wisdom and philosophy. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |-- Ludwig van Beethoven pgpBnh2Qlwvu8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1 builds revisited]
Branden Robinson wrote: I only have a 15 monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth. Can anyone else help him? - Forwarded message from Daryl Moulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] - I also have a 7200/120. Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote: On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The patch should allow strip to do it's job for all packages on every arch but Alpha, so it's safe (this has been tested with every revision thusfar, so it's still needed). Sorry, I didn't know that. I was just trying to protect myself from the Policy Nazis. I think the authors of the ELF loader for XFree86 would be very interested to know about this bug. I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves wether or not to pass -s to install? The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the symbol relocation information which is required for loading. It is probably OK to strip out some other stuff like debugging info. I just peeked at the config file, and I don't see where -s is getting set. Is this a patch to another patch? Has the default behavior of install changed? Should I just wait for the coffee to kick in and then all this will make sense? Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office 5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072 voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630 fax: 954.938.1982 SkyTel: 800.405.3401 http://www.metrolink.com/
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 01:25:40PM -0500, Stuart Anderson wrote: Where is dh_strip invoked? I don't see it in the XFree86 config files, so I'll assume it is run as part of te packagin process. Yes. It is run as part of the debian/rules makefile, which wraps the XFree86 make World and make install rules. Can it be told to removing debugging section, but leave the regular symbols alone, or does the policy require that all symbols be removed? Here's the relevant quote. Note that by default all installed binaries should be stripped, either by using the -s flag to install, or by calling strip on the binaries after they have been copied into debian/tmp but before the tree is made into a package. We know how to turn off stripping for Alpha, that's not the problem. The problem is why the loader is choking on stripped modules. We don't know. -- G. Branden Robinson|The errors of great men are venerable Debian GNU/Linux |because they are more fruitful than the [EMAIL PROTECTED] |truths of little men. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |-- Friedrich Nietzsche pgpy4KScmValB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: the continuing adventures of XFree86 4.0.1
Good news everybody! I have some debs for m68k. The build failed, but this time to to a local configuration problem (sbuild timeout, dh_compress took more than 150 minutes...) I am trying to get them installed now, so that I can test a little. Will make them available tomorrow (no changelog, no upload...), maybe some more people dare testing them (I have no idea yet if it will be working at all on m68k). On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 12:04:56AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: A prerelease of -11, based on the new upstream beta 4.0.1h, is available at the X Strike Force repository. Alpha, ARM, and m68k folks should grab these sources, build, and let me know what changes need to be made to the debian/*.$(ARCH) files. The changelog summarizes what changed on i386. I will start the next build tonight, it takes 20..22h until I get the MANIFEST. Please give my amiga a little time to catch up with the rest, its an 060 and not an ICE.. One problem I see right now, I have no libgl1? 'nother problem (after hand fixing the config): [...] (II) Loader running on linux (II) LoadModule: bitmap (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a (II) Module XFree86 Font Renderer: vendor=XFree86 Font Renderer compiled for 4.0.1g, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: XFree86 Font Renderer ABI class: XFree86 Font Renderer, version 0.2 (II) Loading font (null) (II) LoadModule: pcidata (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libpcidata.a (II) Fatal server error: Caught signal 11. Server aborting I have no PCI bus, I don't see PCI mentioned in the config file, is there a way to stop loading that? Christian
Re: the continuing adventures of XFree86 4.0.1
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001207 12:02]: I have no PCI bus, I don't see PCI mentioned in the config file, is there a way to stop loading that? Me, I would try moving the module to some other directory, and see what happens. :) -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1 buildsrevisited]
Michel Dnzer wrote: Branden Robinson wrote: > > I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't > been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM > so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth. > > Can anyone else help him? > > - Forwarded message from Daryl Moulder [EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > I also have a 7200/120. > > Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a > 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. It works ok on xf3 but not xf4 which is why I suspected there may be a bug somewhere:( Daryl Moulder -- - When everything is not as square as it may seem.
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1buildsrevisited]
Daryl Moulder wrote: Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a 1024x768 resolution? Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody :( What depths have you tried? Can you try others? Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) It works ok on xf3 but not xf4 which is why I suspected there may be a bug somewhere:( Yes, unfortunately... this is with the latest debs, right? Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree86 4.0.1buildsrevisited]
* Michel D?nzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001207 15:55]: Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my default 1024x756 which was the problem. Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024x756 really a normal resolution on your platform? Most folks have a 1024x768 display, but not a 1024x756. shrug -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
authorized users [rfe]
Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but self-documenting config files are nice :). Thanks :) -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: [dmoulder@csse.monash.edu.au: Re: PowerPC XFree864.0.1buildsrevisited]
Seth Arnold wrote: * Michel D?nzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]: > > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my > > default 1024x756 which was the problem. > Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :) Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024x756 really a normal resolution on your platform? Most folks have a 1024x768 display, but not a 1024x756. Oops typo I meant 1074x768 thanks for correcting that:) I havn't tried different colour depths yet I'll give it a go tonight and see what happens. I am using the latest debs, is there a problem with these deb files? Daryl Moulder -- - When everything is not as square as it may seem.
Re: r128 driver still borked in XF4.0.1-9pre10
Michael Flaig wrote: Is there a reason you use the GPM repeater device? GPM supports multiple input devices so the trackpad and the usb mouse works at the same time ... The new input layer does that for you as well in the form of /dev/input/mice . hey, cool! Where can I find documentation to get this to work. A Google search reveals this for example: http://home.munich.netsurf.de/Franz.Sirl/inputppc.html Does XF4 work on your Pismo now ? No, not the -8 packages. Waiting for new ones... Have you downloaded the xfree4 from deb http://people.debian.org/~branden/ woody/powerpc/ they are now -10 ... Well, I would have if they were still there... The only file in the powerpc directory is currently Packages.gz . the bug of -8 packages is fixed but now the packages hang my pismo which is my biggest problem at all. I have the same problem on my Pismo. That is, actually the screen isn't black for me but has an interesting gradient which slowly changes it's color and brightness :) The machine is dead as can be. The strange thing is: The same happens if I take the r128_drv.o from one of my build trees, which work as a whole. So the problem doesn't seem to be just in the driver. Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and the DRI project
X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10 a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now only root is permitted to startx. The second line of /etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody but still no change. When I backed out of the update back to the version 4.0.1-9 packages Xfree86 began working for non root accounts again.
Re: X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
Hello- Yes, I've the same problem when using startx. Logging in through xdm works, though. -Dave Barnett On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Kyle Sallee wrote: After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10 a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now only root is permitted to startx. The second line of /etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody but still no change. When I backed out of the update back to the version 4.0.1-9 packages Xfree86 began working for non root accounts again. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
Hello. try dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common At Thu, 7 Dec 2000 22:26:29 -0500 (EST), Kyle Sallee wrote: After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10 a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now only root is permitted to startx. :
[wsheets@att.net: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).]
- Forwarded message from Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common). Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: none X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Branden, With yesterday's update of xserver-common_4.01-10_i386 I can no longer run X with startx, which I always do. It yields the error message X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting. I have narrrowed the change down to the one file /usr/X11R6/bin/X which is packaged in xserver-common. If I replace that one file with the previous version (4.01-9) the error goes away. Is this a deliberate change in authentication policy or just a bug? If it is deliberate I need to know how to do the authentication properly. Thanks for sharing your time and hard work with all of us out here! Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|A great work of art has never caused any Debian GNU/Linux |social problems. Social problems are [EMAIL PROTECTED] |caused by those trying to protect http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |society from great works of art. pgpCYaAgHGZG4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: authorized users [rfe]
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 04:13:04PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but self-documenting config files are nice :). No, because it would make my parser too complicated. I will, however, write a manpage for the file when I get around to it. -- G. Branden Robinson |You live and learn. Debian GNU/Linux|Or you don't live long. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Robert Heinlein http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | pgp6acvsULCZ1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [wsheets@att.net: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).]
[branden, you *need* to change the maintainer address to debian-x -- this is getting nuts. :] Walter: the /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config file needs to be updated. Change `root' to read `console' or `everyone' (or `everybody'?). * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001207 20:20]: - Forwarded message from Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Walter Sheets [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common). Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: none X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Branden, With yesterday's update of xserver-common_4.01-10_i386 I can no longer run X with startx, which I always do. It yields the error message X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting. I have narrrowed the change down to the one file /usr/X11R6/bin/X which is packaged in xserver-common. If I replace that one file with the previous version (4.01-9) the error goes away. Is this a deliberate change in authentication policy or just a bug? If it is deliberate I need to know how to do the authentication properly. Thanks for sharing your time and hard work with all of us out here! Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|A great work of art has never caused any Debian GNU/Linux |social problems. Social problems are [EMAIL PROTECTED] |caused by those trying to protect http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |society from great works of art. -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote: This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They have a .dynsym section which is still there even if the object gets stripped. Ok, that'll help me track it down. There is a problem with objcopy/strip that I'm trying to track down (I'm the binutils maintainer for Debian, incidentally), so that may be involved as well. What is the error message when it chokes? I'll dig out an old log and forward it to the list. I don't have the message handy right now and am running too many package builds to start X right now. It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others. Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha x86 versions of the same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences. Will do...now that I have an x86 around here, it'll be easy to compare... C
Re: [Xpert] stripping X server modules on Alpha makes them unusable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote: It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others. Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha x86 versions of the same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences. While I've got you here, I've run into a problem with X -configure segfaulting in the s3virge driver. I haven't checked it lately (meaning in the past three weeks), so it might be fixed already (I'll check again tomorrow), but I wanted to see if you had heard of anything like this... C
