Ok. Mozilla caused my X phase2v27 to crash miserably a few minutes ago.
Restarting X gave me a bit of a surprise -- no more xinerama. I have
Option "Xinerama"
in my /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 file, the same place it has been for weeks.
I tried giving +xinerama on the command line. (That broug
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Chris Gray wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> > gnome-terminal supports -e and --title or -t, but not -T.
>
> This changed in the most recent woody gnome-terminal to -T but not -t.
>
Well, I'm
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:43:56PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001030 18:39]:
> > The bright ones here will be saying "Oh gods, he's going to ask about
> > libGLU, isn't he?"
>
> What I *REALLY* want to know is why KDE (including konqueror) worked
> fine for sev
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 09:38:45PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> What I want to know is if anyone knows of a work-around until the
> situation is fixed properly. I suspect that this has been answered
> before, but I can't seem to find it.
I extracted libGLU.so.1.1.030201 from the mesag3 package,
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 08:26:28PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I think requiring a *small* compatibility subset is the way to go. There's
> > not all that many things a terminal emulator needs to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Chris Gray wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> > gnome-terminal supports -e and --title or -t, but not -T.
>
> This changed in the most recent woody gnome-terminal to -T but not -t.
>
Well, I'm
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> gnome-terminal supports -e and --title or -t, but not -T.
This changed in the most recent woody gnome-terminal to -T but not -t.
Cheers,
Chris
* Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001030 18:39]:
> The bright ones here will be saying "Oh gods, he's going to ask about
> libGLU, isn't he?"
What I *REALLY* want to know is why KDE (including konqueror) worked
fine for several days! For a short time it didn't require libGLU? For a
short time Br
...I'm going to do it anyway.
OK, I've been using the phase2 4.0.1 .debs since they came out, with
relatively few problems. I like how easy Dexter made it to make a
config file, but I did notice that I seem to have lost a lot of my
fonts when I did so (I seem to lack scalable fonts, and I'd li
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I think requiring a *small* compatibility subset is the way to go. There's
> not all that many things a terminal emulator needs to be able to
> configurably from the command line to satisfy the requireme
You are in luck! Charl P. Botha has gone before you, and already solved
this problem. He was kind enough to write an entire HOWTO about the
situation, and posted its URL to the debian-x archives. I decided that
something was obviously wrong if you couldn't find it, so I added the
thread and the HOW
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> eterm supports both -e and -T.
>
> xterm ditto
>
> kterm ditto
>
> cxterm.common ditto
>
> the members of rxvt-ml
> krxvt
> grxvt
> crxvt
> crxvt-big5
> crxvt-gb
> all support both -e and -T
>
> xvt support
Tomasz, in every package's life, there are some contemporary packages.
It works best to use the versions of those packages when trying to
compile software, especially for anything as complex as X. Would you
expect Windows 16 executables to build against Win32 libraries? Or a.out
binaries to run on
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 05:08:32PM -0800, Bradley Bell wrote:
> isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
> xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
> a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
> provide an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Marc Martinez wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:17:21PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Can someone help me establish whether the existing X terminal emulators in
> > Debian do in fact support all those options? If so, then
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 05:08:32PM -0800, Bradley Bell wrote:
> isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
> xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
> a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
> provide an
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:43:56PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001030 18:39]:
> > The bright ones here will be saying "Oh gods, he's going to ask about
> > libGLU, isn't he?"
>
> What I *REALLY* want to know is why KDE (including konqueror) worked
> fine for se
Nutcase, please don't bother Branden. He gets far too much email as it
is.
Before installing the 4.0.1 .debs, please check the debian-x archives
for Branden's mini-faq. Reading it will likely save you some trouble.
(Though Branden, it has been several weeks since I last saw one posted
to the list
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 09:38:45PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> What I want to know is if anyone knows of a work-around until the
> situation is fixed properly. I suspect that this has been answered
> before, but I can't seem to find it.
I extracted libGLU.so.1.1.030201 from the mesag3 package,
isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
provide an 'xterm compatibility wrapper', and have x-terminal-emulator point
to
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 08:26:28PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I think requiring a *small* compatibility subset is the way to go. There's
> > not all that many things a terminal emulator needs to b
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:17:21PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Can someone help me establish whether the existing X terminal emulators in
> Debian do in fact support all those options? If so, then it should be
> straightforward to make this requirement part of policy.
>
> To try to answer yo
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> gnome-terminal supports -e and --title or -t, but not -T.
This changed in the most recent woody gnome-terminal to -T but not -t.
Cheers,
Chris
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? C
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:16:01PM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> I'd like to add a menu entry for a command that needs a terminal
> emulator. Can I rely on x-terminal-emulator understanding -e? How
> about -T? Is this codified somewhere?
Your question is wonderfully on-charter for the debian-x lis
- Forwarded message from lqw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: lqw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xfree86 4.0.1 on potato
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:47:41 +
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.
* Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001030 18:39]:
> The bright ones here will be saying "Oh gods, he's going to ask about
> libGLU, isn't he?"
What I *REALLY* want to know is why KDE (including konqueror) worked
fine for several days! For a short time it didn't require libGLU? For a
short time B
...I'm going to do it anyway.
OK, I've been using the phase2 4.0.1 .debs since they came out, with
relatively few problems. I like how easy Dexter made it to make a
config file, but I did notice that I seem to have lost a lot of my
fonts when I did so (I seem to lack scalable fonts, and I'd l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I think requiring a *small* compatibility subset is the way to go. There's
> not all that many things a terminal emulator needs to be able to
> configurably from the command line to satisfy the requirem
You are in luck! Charl P. Botha has gone before you, and already solved
this problem. He was kind enough to write an entire HOWTO about the
situation, and posted its URL to the debian-x archives. I decided that
something was obviously wrong if you couldn't find it, so I added the
thread and the HO
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:58:17PM -0600, sam th wrote:
> eterm supports both -e and -T.
>
> xterm ditto
>
> kterm ditto
>
> cxterm.common ditto
>
> the members of rxvt-ml
> krxvt
> grxvt
> crxvt
> crxvt-big5
> crxvt-gb
> all support both -e and -T
>
> xvt suppor
Tomasz, in every package's life, there are some contemporary packages.
It works best to use the versions of those packages when trying to
compile software, especially for anything as complex as X. Would you
expect Windows 16 executables to build against Win32 libraries? Or a.out
binaries to run on
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 05:08:32PM -0800, Bradley Bell wrote:
> isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
> xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
> a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
> provide a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Marc Martinez wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:17:21PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Can someone help me establish whether the existing X terminal emulators in
> > Debian do in fact support all those options? If so, then
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 05:08:32PM -0800, Bradley Bell wrote:
> isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
> xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
> a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
> provide a
Nutcase, please don't bother Branden. He gets far too much email as it
is.
Before installing the 4.0.1 .debs, please check the debian-x archives
for Branden's mini-faq. Reading it will likely save you some trouble.
(Though Branden, it has been several weeks since I last saw one posted
to the list
isn't xterm the 'de facto' standard? it would seem to me that any options
xterm understands ought to be supported by x-terminal-emulator. If
a certain terminal emulater is not xterm compatible, it would be trivial to
provide an 'xterm compatibility wrapper', and have x-terminal-emulator point
to
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:17:21PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Can someone help me establish whether the existing X terminal emulators in
> Debian do in fact support all those options? If so, then it should be
> straightforward to make this requirement part of policy.
>
> To try to answer y
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:17:27PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
My jpilot is also fine, I just did a sync:
dpkg -s jpilot xfree86-common|egrep '^Pa|^V'
Package: jpilot
Version: 0.98.1-1
Package: xfree86-common
Version: 4.0.1-0phase2v29
--
charl p. botha
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:17:27PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
FWIW, I haven't had any prolems with jpilot and X4. I just did my
weekly backup with 4.0.1-0phase2v27.
David
--
David Engel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:16:01PM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> I'd like to add a menu entry for a command that needs a terminal
> emulator. Can I rely on x-terminal-emulator understanding -e? How
> about -T? Is this codified somewhere?
Your question is wonderfully on-charter for the debian-x li
- Forwarded message from lqw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: lqw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xfree86 4.0.1 on potato
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:47:41 +
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 09:19:17PM +, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
>
> [tornado;~]-1> jpilot
> pi_bind: Permission denied
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x890)!
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x891)!
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x8
jpilot doesn't work with X4:
[tornado;~]-1> jpilot
pi_bind: Permission denied
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x890)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x891)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x892)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x893)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:17:27PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
My jpilot is also fine, I just did a sync:
dpkg -s jpilot xfree86-common|egrep '^Pa|^V'
Package: jpilot
Version: 0.98.1-1
Package: xfree86-common
Version: 4.0.1-0phase2v29
--
charl p. botha
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:17:27PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
FWIW, I haven't had any prolems with jpilot and X4. I just did my
weekly backup with 4.0.1-0phase2v27.
David
--
David Engel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 09:19:17PM +, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> jpilot doesn't work with X4:
>
> [tornado;~]-1> jpilot
> pi_bind: Permission denied
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x890)!
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x891)!
> Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x
jpilot doesn't work with X4:
[tornado;~]-1> jpilot
pi_bind: Permission denied
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x890)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x891)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x892)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x893)!
Xlib: unexpected async reply
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
Hi,
You can add these to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86cfg/loader.c.
I think one possible solution is to patch
xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/loader/xf86sym.c to use it in xf86cfg, so
that when that file is changed, there will be no need to
Someone knock him around with a cluebat for me? I see no reason why I must
support woody's libc in potato's packages.
A fix for the problem he reports has been in the woody XF3 .debs for weeks.
- Forwarded message from Tomasz Motylewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Tomasz Motylewski <[EM
- Forwarded message from nutcase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: nutcase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xfree 4.0.1 via apt
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:24:32 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: Mozill
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
Hi,
You can add these to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86cfg/loader.c.
I think one possible solution is to patch
xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/loader/xf86sym.c to use it in xf86cfg, so
that when that file is changed, there will be no need t
Hello all,
I have tried repeatedly to compile by source deb packages for phase 2
xfree86-4.0.1. Always using the source and diffs and brandens site ie: apt-get
-b source xfree86.
Problem is that every time it fails in the glide directory, saying there is no
glide2.h or something.
I have a Ma
On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 10:31:29PM +, Matthew Sackman wrote:
>
> I've installed XFree 4v26 and it seemed ok - no error messages etc;
> I use an Nvidia TNT2 M64 card, and got the kernel module and the
> GLX files from NVidia.
>
> However, both refused to compile. I figured that I needed
> /u
Someone knock him around with a cluebat for me? I see no reason why I must
support woody's libc in potato's packages.
A fix for the problem he reports has been in the woody XF3 .debs for weeks.
- Forwarded message from Tomasz Motylewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Tomasz Motylewski <[E
- Forwarded message from nutcase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: nutcase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xfree 4.0.1 via apt
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:24:32 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: Mozil
Hello all,
I have tried repeatedly to compile by source deb packages for phase 2 xfree86-4.0.1.
Always using the source and diffs and brandens site ie: apt-get -b source xfree86.
Problem is that every time it fails in the glide directory, saying there is no
glide2.h or something.
I have a Ma
On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 10:31:29PM +, Matthew Sackman wrote:
>
> I've installed XFree 4v26 and it seemed ok - no error messages etc;
> I use an Nvidia TNT2 M64 card, and got the kernel module and the
> GLX files from NVidia.
>
> However, both refused to compile. I figured that I needed
> /
57 matches
Mail list logo
