[Bug 1914147]
In reply to "when", I never experienced this problem up to and including 84.0.2. I first got this problem in 85.0, and still get it in 85.0.1. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1914147 Title: [upstream] Firefox 85 hangs at startup To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/firefox/+bug/1914147/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 680614] Re: Position of second monitor wrong in dual monitor setup if first monitor is 1366x768
I have personally observed this bug on Fedora 16, Fedora 17 and openSUSE 12.1, so it would appear to be an upstream Xorg bug, not a specific Ubuntu bug. I can live very well with the circumvention described in Comment #23, but any- one who has a strong desire for this bug to be fixed might like to open a bug directly against Xorg itself, presumably on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/680614 Title: Position of second monitor wrong in dual monitor setup if first monitor is 1366x768 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-ati/+bug/680614/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 680614] Re: Position of second monitor wrong in dual monitor setup if first monitor is 1366x768
On my laptop this problem has been somewhat alleviated by moving the external VGA display (on the right-hand side of the laptop display) two pixels to the right, so that the external monitor begins at 1368+0 (instead of 1366+0). Now there is no vertical stripe overflowing from the right-hand edge of the laptop display onto the left-hand edge of the external display, so everything looks clean (possibly because 1368 is a multiple of four?). The disadvantage is of course that there is a two- pixel gap between the two displays, but this is only really a problem if windows are placed spanning the displays (which I never do). The identical problem is encountered on my laptop with Fedora 16 and with openSUSE 12.1, but NOT with Windows 7 SP1, so it would appear to be a generic problem with Xorg across various Linux distros. Here is the xrandr which alleviates the problem, showing the VGA starting at 1368+0: Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 2648 x 1024, maximum 8192 x 8192 LVDS connected 1366x768+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 344mm x 193mm 1366x768 60.0*+ 1280x720 59.9 1152x768 59.8 1024x768 120.1 60.0 59.9 960x720 120.0 928x696 120.1 896x672 120.0 800x600 120.0 60.3 59.9 56.2 848x48059.7 700x525 120.0 720x48059.7 640x512 120.0 640x480 120.0 59.9 59.4 512x384 120.0 400x300 120.6112.7 320x240 120.1 HDMI-0 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) VGA-0 connected 1280x1024+1368+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 317mm x 254mm 1280x1024 60.0*+ 75.0 1280x960 75.0 60.0 1152x864 75.0 1024x768 75.1 70.1 60.0 832x62474.6 800x60072.2 75.0 60.3 56.2 640x48072.8 75.0 66.7 60.0 720x40070.1 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/680614 Title: Position of second monitor wrong in dual monitor setup if first monitor is 1366x768 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-ati/+bug/680614/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 484677] Re: init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4
Comment #5 states: This is a normal exit code to indicate that there is no pack file for a separate filesystem you have in your fstab. The bug is that Upstart displays them (and is already filed elsewhere). Comment #50 states: The message is just a warning from upstart that should not appear on the console - there is already a bug filed on upstart that the warning is visible at all. Where is this Upstart bug filed (so that I can track it) ? -- init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/484677 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 484677] Re: init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4
Comment #5 states: This is a normal exit code to indicate that there is no pack file for a separate filesystem you have in your fstab. The bug is that Upstart displays them (and is already filed elsewhere). Where is this Upstart bug filed (so that I can track it) ? ** Changed in: ureadahead (Ubuntu) Status: Invalid = Confirmed -- init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/484677 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 502837] Re: bind mounts cause lots of init: ureadahead-other main process (1234) terminated with status 4 messages
During Ubuntu 09.10 boot, the message init: ureadahead-other main process (473) terminated with status 4 also appears on my system. /etc/fstab is as follows: /dev/sda3 / ext4errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/sda6 /d ext3defaults0 2 /dev/sda5 swap swapsw 0 0 tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults0 0 Note /dev/sda6 is a data partition. The rest is self-explanatory. /var/lib/ureadahead contains TWO pack files: pack (presumably for the root file system); tmp.pack (presumably for the /tmp file system). /var/lib/ureadahead does NOT contain a pack file named d.pack. Ubuntu Bug 432360 contains the following text: ureadahead has better support for separate filesystems, when tracing it will generate additional pack files for each of the separate mounts (each one individually optimised) - and uses the mountall-generated 'mount' event to run over those. How can I investigate why ureadahead generates pack files for the root and /tmp file systems, but not for the /d file system? -- bind mounts cause lots of init: ureadahead-other main process (1234) terminated with status 4 messages https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/502837 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 484677] Re: init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4
During Ubuntu 09.10 boot, the message init: ureadahead-other main process (473) terminated with status 4 also appears on my system. /etc/fstab is as follows: /dev/sda3 / ext4errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/sda6 /d ext3defaults0 2 /dev/sda5 swap swapsw 0 0 tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults0 0 Note /dev/sda6 is a data partition. The rest is self-explanatory. /var/lib/ureadahead contains TWO pack files: pack (presumably for the root file system); tmp.pack (presumably for the /tmp file system). /var/lib/ureadahead does NOT contain a pack file named d.pack. Ubuntu Bug 432360 contains the following text: ureadahead has better support for separate filesystems, when tracing it will generate additional pack files for each of the separate mounts (each one individually optimised) - and uses the mountall-generated 'mount' event to run over those. How can I investigate why ureadahead generates pack files for the root and /tmp file systems, but not for the /d file system? -- init: ureadahead-other main process terminated with status 4 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/484677 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
