On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 11:33:13 -0700 Max Bell wrote:
> Why isn't the bug being fixed? That is obviously the correct solution.
So far, they argue that it's correct and only exposed bugs in all those
other packages. Which may even be correct. But without a clear
perspective of getting those fixed anyti
On Wed, 03 Aug 2022 20:06:28 +0200, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> So, should Debian build with --disable-thread-safety-constructor, at
> least for a while?
I can confirm that the following trivial change avoids the issues I'm
seeing in glxinfo and xscreensaver-gl-visual:
#v+
--- libx11-1.8.1/debia
On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 14:57:59 +0200, Hermann Meyer wrote:
> With libx11-6 1.8.1 I get:
>
> |glxinfo name of display: :0 glxinfo: ../nptl/pthread_mutex_lock.c:424:
> __pthread_mutex_lock_full: Assertion `e != ESRCH || !robust' failed.
> Abgebrochen|
Same here.
With xscreensaver I also see SIGABR
Why isn't the bug being fixed? That is obviously the correct solution.
On 8/3/22, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> This is issue 157 upstream:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libx11/-/issues/157
> Apparently, they do not want to revert it.
>
> So, should Debian build with --disable-thread-sa
This is issue 157 upstream:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libx11/-/issues/157
Apparently, they do not want to revert it.
So, should Debian build with --disable-thread-safety-constructor, at
least for a while?
(Remember that this bug will soon block other packages from migrating,
e.g. th
With libx11-6 1.8.1 I get:
|glxinfo name of display: :0 glxinfo: ../nptl/pthread_mutex_lock.c:424:
__pthread_mutex_lock_full: Assertion `e != ESRCH || !robust' failed.
Abgebrochen|
rebuilding libx11 with the --disable-thread-safety-constructor flag
solved the issue.
|System: Host: box Kernel
6 matches
Mail list logo
