Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-15
Severity: minor
The old bug here:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=100451&archive=False&mbox=no
...seems to have come back to life.
~>man savage | grep -A1 -B2 shadowfb
Option "ShadowFB" "boolean"
Enable or disable
Probably you are the uploader of the following file(s) in
the Debian upload queue directory:
xfree86_4.3.0-1.diff.gz
xfree86_4.3.0-1.dsc
xfree86_4.3.0.orig.tar.gz
This looks like an upload, but a .changes file is missing, so the job
cannot be processed.
If no .changes file arrives within 23:
xfree86_4.3.0-1_source+i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
xfree86_4.3.0-1.dsc
xfree86_4.3.0.orig.tar.gz
xfree86_4.3.0-1.diff.gz
lbxproxy_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps-dev_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libice6_4.3.
Rejected: md5sum and/or size mismatch on existing copy of
xfree86_4.3.0.orig.tar.gz.
Rejected: can not overwrite existing copy of 'xfree86_4.3.0.orig.tar.gz'
already in the archive.
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to th
xfree86_4.3.0-1_source+i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
xfree86_4.3.0-1.dsc
xfree86_4.3.0-1.diff.gz
lbxproxy_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps-dev_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libice6_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libice6-dbg_4
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
xlibs-dbg_4.3.0-1_all.deb: package says section is oldlibs, override says
libdevel.
xlibs-dev_4.3.0-1_all.deb: package says section is oldlibs, override says
libdevel.
xlibs-dev_4.3.0-1_a
Accepted:
lbxproxy_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/lbxproxy_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps-dev_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/libdps-dev_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/libdps1-dbg_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
libdps1_4.3.0-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:34:19 +1100
Source: xfree86
Binary: libx11-6-dbg libxtst6-dbg xserver-common xlibs-static-dev libxp6-dbg
xbase-clients xlibmesa3-dbg libxtrap6-dbg xfonts-75dpi libxt6 libice6-dbg xmh
libxaw6-dbg x-dev libxv1 libx
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:25 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#227217: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:25 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#226292: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:25 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#225759: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#216896: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#215997: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#209352: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#200857: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:21 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#190323: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#184322: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#183300: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#183619: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:17 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#112703: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:17 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#110974: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:18 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#143825: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:17 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#128125: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:18 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#138883: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:19 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#172550: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#179929: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:21 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#185936: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:21 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#187374: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:21 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#187365: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:26 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#228810: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:26 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#228408: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:22 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#196058: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#220814: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#210651: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#204358: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#204358: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:19:25 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#224757: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-26 22:31:24 -0500 (Mon, 26 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 970
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Add epoch to revert upload of 4.3.0-1 which hijacked the package.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
---
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-26 22:44:01 -0500 (Mon, 26 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 971
Added:
trunk/debian/patches/098_fix_lnx_io_kbd_rate_fix.diff
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Pull fix for SPARC FTBFS from branches/4.3.0/sid.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 00:31:33 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 972
Modified:
trunk/debian/patches/098_fix_lnx_io_kbd_rate_fix.diff
Log:
Make patch actually apply to XFree86 4.2.1.
Modified: trunk/debian/patches/098_fix_lnx_io_kbd_rate_fix.diff
===
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 00:32:17 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 973
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Tweak wording in justification for epoch.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- trunk/debian/changelog
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 00:50:13 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 974
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/xlibs.shlibs
Log:
Make xlibs's shlibs file report names of post-xlibs-split packages from
experimental as alternatives to a versioned dependency on xlibs, where
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 00:54:19 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 975
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/shlibs.local
Log:
Resync shlibs.local with change to xlibs.shlibs.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 01:09:06 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 976
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/patches/099_ati_recognize_radeon_9200_se.diff
Log:
Add recognition of two models of Radeon Mobility 9200 ("M9+") as
RV280-based chipset
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 01:11:22 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 977
Added:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/patches/099_ati_recognize_more_RV280_models.diff
Removed:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/patches/099_ati_recognize_radeon_9200_se.diff
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/chang
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # reopen bug closed by unathorized upload of 4.3.0-1 to unstable
> reopen 204358
Bug#204358: libx11-6: attempts to dlopen() Xcursor library with bad filename
Bug#226545: libx11-6:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # this bug is fixed in experimental
> tags 204358 + fixed-in-experimental
Bug#204358: libx11-6: attempts to dlopen() Xcursor library with bad filename
Tags were: experimental upstr
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # reopen bug closed by unathorized upload of 4.3.0-1 to unstable
> reopen 212186
Bug#212186: xlibmesa-drm-source: cannot build xlibmesa-drm-modules package with
recent dpkg-dev
Bu
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # this bug is fixed in experimental
> tags 212186 + fixed-in-experimental
Bug#212186: xlibmesa-drm-source: cannot build xlibmesa-drm-modules package with
recent dpkg-dev
Tags were
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # reopen bug closed by unathorized upload of 4.3.0-1 to unstable
> reopen 215831
Bug#215831: xlibmesa-gl: CPU detetction code thinks Intel Pentium 4 has 3Dnow
extensions, causing
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> # this bug is fixed in experimental
> tags 215831 + fixed-in-experimental
Bug#215831: xlibmesa-gl: CPU detetction code thinks Intel Pentium 4 has 3Dnow
extensions, causing SIGILL
Hello,
I'm using X packages from experimental (version 4.3.0-0pre1v5) because
I have an i830 card in a new box. This box works fine with recent Knoppix
or Gnoppix inserted, i.e. they work as expcted with X.
If I use the original Debian packages answering all the debconf questions
I get the XFree8
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 07:29:50PM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tuesday January 20 2004 15:34, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> > Le lun 19/01/2004 à 12:15, Harald Dunkel a écrit :
> > > Is there a chance to get it included as an official
> > > timing in the ati driver, and in the debconf installation
> >
tag 229566 + help
thanks
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:09:13PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> * Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> helena:~$ xterm
> >> xterm: fatal pty error 23 (errno=22) on tty /dev/pts/3
> >
> > Hmm. Is the devpts pseudo-filesystem mounted?
>
> Yes, it is:
>
> |
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:11:42PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Sorry for posting in private, but this mail is not in the
> mailing list archive after 5 hours. I just want to make
> sure that there is no problem with the list software ...
You mailed [EMAIL PROTECTED]; please don't mail that
addr
retitle 229879 xserver-xfree86: [savage] savage(4x) manpage refers to
nonexistent shadowfb(4x) manpage
tag 229879 + upstream
thanks
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:36:01AM -0500, A Costa wrote:
> Package: xserver-xfree86
> Version: 4.2.1-15
> Severity: minor
>
> The old bug here:
> http://bugs.debian
Package: xlibmesa-dri
Version: 4.3.0-1
Severity: important
Tags: sid
Since I upgraded to xfree 4.3.0-1, OpenGL stopped to work on my ATI Radeon
7500 QW card. glxinfo returns me "direct rendering: No".
If I try to execute glxinfo with LIBGL_DEBUG set, I get
libGL: XF86DRIGetClientDriverName: 4.0.
I downgraded the X server to 4.2.1-11, and did not see the problem for
nearly a week, but it has just reared its ugly head again, so that
didn't fix it. I will go back to -10 now..
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
**
* IOL - ALERTA de Virus **
**
O Antivirus IOL detectou a existencia do(s) seguinte(s) virus numa
mensagem de correio que lhe fo
On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 19:32, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:11:42PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> > (II) Reloading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libddc.a
> >
> >*** If unresolved symbols were reported above, they might not
> >*** be the reason for the server aborting.
> >
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 11:28:21 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 978
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
Log:
Add (small) item to be done before 4.3.0-1.
Modified: branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
===
--- branc
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 12:50:23 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 979
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
The upload of 4.3.0-1 to unstable was UNACCEPTed by katie while still in
queue/accepted (i.e., before propagation to the pool), so wax the epoch.
Modified: trunk/debian/c
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 13:06:02 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 980
Modified:
branches/4.1.0/woody/debian/changelog
Log:
Further clarify relation of vulnerabilities to CVE candidate IDs.
Modified: branches/4.1.0/woody/debian/changelog
=
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 14:00:11 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 981
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
Log:
Clean up bug-closers for SiS driver issues.
Modified: branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
===
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 14:15:30 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 982
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
Log:
Finish cleaning up bug-closers from 4.3.0-0pre1v1.
Modified: branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
===
Analyzing /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults:
drwxr-xr-x 14 root root 4096 May 17 2002 /usr
drwxr-xr-x6 root root 4096 May 17 2002 /usr/X11R6
drwxr-xr-x5 root root 4096 Jan 27 15:51 /usr/X11R6/lib
drwxr-xr-x 15 root root 4096 Jan 27 15:51
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 15:14:04 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 983
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
Log:
Update patch status.
Modified: branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TODO
===
--- branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/TO
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 15:16:29 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 984
Modified:
trunk/debian/patches/062_proxymngr_manpage_fixes.diff
trunk/debian/patches/063_mga_texmode_restore_fix.diff
trunk/debian/patches/067_nonexecutable_malloced_mem.diff
Log:
Update patch upstream-st
Your message dated Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:51:48 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Bug#228665: xserver-xfree86: [mouse]
SendCoreEvents + ServerLayout entry leads to doubled events]
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that
Author: branden
Date: 2004-01-27 17:47:38 -0500 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004)
New Revision: 985
Modified:
trunk/debian/xlibs.shlibs.dummy
Log:
Sort file in ASCIIbetical order for easier comparison with xlibs.shlibs.
Modified: trunk/debian/xlibs.shlibs.dummy
==
I'm back. My main computer started suffering progressive failures on the
motherboard. :-( Now I'm working on my fiancee's computer.
I've only worked on patches on the TODO list which aren't already marked. :-)
090_ati_radeon_9000_support
---
Irrelevant. Says in the pa
076_xterm_workaround_getpt_lie
--
Upstream in 4.3.0.
(Patch says: Fixed upstream in main.c revision 3.154.
Which is well before the revision pf main.c in 4.3.0.)
077_man_dir_and_suffix_cleanup
--
Already merged into the new
004_imake_manpage_
086_xc_programs_manpage_overhaul
Unchanged, renumbered to 026
087_ati_driver_message_cleanups
---
Unchanged, renumbered to 027
088_radeon_dpms_fix
---
Irrelevant.
An entirely different patch (048_radeon_dpms_on_dvi_suppo
070_fbdevhw_device_node_warnings
Mostly upstream in 4.3.0 The following chunk isn't:
@@ -296,34 +296,45 @@
}
if (namep)
*namep = NULL;
+ xf86DrvMsg(-1, X_ERROR,
+ "Unable to find a valid framebuffer device\n");
311_arm_compiler_h
--
Apparently merged into 302_arm_compiler_h.diff
312_riscpc_xkb_keycodes
---
Basically unchanged, renamed to 300_riscpc_xkb_keycodes.diff
314_not_all_arm_boxes_run_netbsd
Unchanged, renamed to 301_not_all_arm
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 08:02:37PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> 088_radeon_dpms_fix
> ---
> Irrelevant.
> An entirely different patch (048_radeon_dpms_on_dvi_support.diff)
> appears to accomplish the same function now, insofar as the support is
> not upstream.
I believe branch'
98 matches
Mail list logo
