xorg-server_1.1.1-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
xorg-server_1.1.1-3.dsc
xorg-server_1.1.1-3.diff.gz
xserver-xorg-core_1.1.1-3_i386.deb
xserver-xorg-dev_1.1.1-3_i386.deb
xdmx_1.1.1-3_i386.deb
xdmx-tools_1.1.1-3_i386.deb
xnest_1.1.1-3_i386.deb
Your message dated Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:47:18 -0700
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#362641: fixed in xorg-server 1:1.1.1-3
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
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 21:09 +0200, Michael Hartmann wrote:
(**) RgbPath set to /usr/lib/X11/rgb
The '(**)' indicates that your xorg.conf contains an RgbPath line. Do
things work without symlink if you comment that out?
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer |
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 23:11 -0400, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin
* Steal patch from Ubuntu by Fabio to unconditionally enable ZAxisMapping in
dexconf
[...]
--- trunk/debian/xorg/debian/local/dexconf2006-08-22 03:04:13 UTC (rev
2888)
+++ trunk/debian/xorg/debian/local/dexconf
On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 09:10 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 23:11 -0400, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin
--- trunk/debian/xorg/debian/local/dexconf 2006-08-22 03:04:13 UTC (rev
2888)
+++ trunk/debian/xorg/debian/local/dexconf 2006-08-22 03:10:59 UTC (rev
2889)
Things work still fine without RgbPath line in xorg.conf and symlink.
I'm not using a xorg.conf generated by Debian, because it doesn't work on my
pc, so I just use the knoppix generated xorg.conf.
When reporting this I forgot to check that with a debian generated xorg.conf.
In fact I was just
Your message dated Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:50:10 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#384080: Tk may not work without rgb-symlink
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
The Dear Project Leader wrote:
Yesterday, glibc 2.3.999.2-10 was accidently uploaded to unstable instead
of experimental, and on the request of the release managers, I UNACCEPTed
it, given it was a major accidental change to a rather core library just
as that library should've been frozen.
Package: xserver-xorg
Severity: wishlist
Please could you add 1280x800 to the list of valid resolutions? This is my
monitor's optimal resolution.
Sidenote: This is getting awkward. I think it'd be a good idea to replace the
multiselect template with a text one that has the same defaults. This
* Drew Parsons ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060822 11:04]:
2) [technical] Remove the single point of failure by adding a
Distribution: field to debian/control, say. The package will be
rejected if the two fields in control and changelog do not match.
or just make dpkg-buildpackage fail if that
On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 10:51 +0200, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
Please could you add 1280x800 to the list of valid resolutions? This is my
monitor's optimal resolution.
Out of curiosity: if you don't specify any resolutions explicitly, does
the X server automagically come up in 1280x800?
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
I haven't quite figured out how to detect whether the bug is present or not.
(How do I spot whether a fontname is a 'fixed size' name for a scalable font,
or a real fixed-size font?)
Is this bug still present in the current
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 20:59 +, David Nusinow wrote:
This release of the X server features an internal ABI bump. As such,
we've had to rebuild all of the X video drivers. This task is now complete
and all of them are either in experimental or incoming.
Do
Author: bubulle
Date: 2006-08-22 08:30:34 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2900
Modified:
trunk/debian/xorg/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/xorg/debian/po/pt_BR.po
Log:
Brazilian Portuguese translation update
Modified: trunk/debian/xorg/debian/changelog
I wrote:
Michel DÃnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 20:59 +, David Nusinow wrote:
Do the package dependencies reflect the fact that the new
xserver-xorg-core will break old drivers yet? One idea would be to
change the name of the virtual package xserver-xorg-video to
tags 373880 pending
thanks
I recommend never sendign patches for translation files.
Sorry Christian. Attach you will find the complete potfile.
And sorry for the delay.
I committed the file anyway..:-)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi there lovely,
I was searching athe net few days ago. I am new to this thing.
aand saw your bprofile. I decided tbo email you cause I found
you attractive. I might come down to your city bin few weeks.
Lebt me know if we can meet each other in person.
I bam attractive girl. I amb sure you won't
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
tags 373880 pending
Bug#373880: xorg: [INTL:pt_BR] Please update pt_BR debconf template translation
Tags were: fixed pending l10n patch
Tags added: pending
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug
Revised patch with a minor improvement.
--
Robert Millan
My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for
spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.
diff -Nur libxau-1.0.1.old/debian/control libxau-1.0.1/debian/control
---
Author: dparsons
Date: 2006-08-22 10:52:33 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2901
Modified:
branches/7.1/driver/xserver-xorg-video-ark/debian/changelog
branches/7.1/driver/xserver-xorg-video-ark/debian/control
branches/7.1/driver/xserver-xorg-video-ati/debian/changelog
Package: libxext6
Version: 1:1.0.1-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32xext6 and lib32xext-dev).
(needs lib32x11 first)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Author: dparsons
Date: 2006-08-22 11:05:29 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2902
Modified:
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/changelog
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/control
Log:
* Tighten dependencies between X11R7.1 server and video drivers.
xserver-xorg-core
Author: dparsons
Date: 2006-08-22 11:14:18 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2903
Modified:
branches/7.1/debian/xorg/debian/changelog
branches/7.1/debian/xorg/debian/control
Log:
* Tighten dependencies between X11R7.1 server and video drivers.
xserver-xorg Depends:
Author: dparsons
Date: 2006-08-22 11:24:35 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2904
Modified:
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/changelog
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/control
Log:
* xserver-xorg-core no longer Depends: xserver-xorg-video-all
| xserver-xorg-video. The
Package: libice6
Version: 1:1.0.1-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32ice6 and lib32ice-dev).
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Package: libsm6
Version: 1:1.0.1-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32sm6 and lib32sm-dev).
(needs lib32ice first)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Dänzer wrote:
* Tighten dependencies between X11R7.1 server and video drivers.
xserver-xorg-core no longer Depends: xserver-xorg-video-all |
xserver-xorg-$but instead Conflicts: xserver-xorg-video. The dependency
on
xserver-xorg-video-all | xserver-xorg-video-1.0 is managed
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20
tags 381342 patch
Bug#381342: please provide lib32xext{6,-dev} (needed for wine)
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32sm6 and lib32sm-dev).
(needs lib32ice first)
Um, why don't you focus your energies on proper multiarch support
instead of trying to propagate hacks like this further than they need to
Author: daenzer
Date: 2006-08-22 12:51:22 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2905
Modified:
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/changelog
Log:
Add some bug closers.
Modified: branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/changelog
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32sm6 and lib32sm-dev).
(needs lib32ice first)
Um, why don't you focus your energies on proper multiarch support
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32sm6 and lib32sm-dev).
(needs lib32ice first)
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:49:34PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch
Drew Parsons a écrit :
The Dear Project Leader wrote:
Yesterday, glibc 2.3.999.2-10 was accidently uploaded to unstable instead
of experimental, and on the request of the release managers, I UNACCEPTed
it, given it was a major accidental change to a rather core library just
as that library
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
retitle 156115 xserver-xorg-core: X server lists scalable fonts with fixed
font names, and before real fixed fonts
Bug#156115: xserver-xfree86: [core server] X server generates bogus font names
for scalable fonts
Changed Bug title.
tags 156115
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:12:33PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:49:34PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:23:23PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:12:33PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:49:34PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:12:14PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Please take a look at http://wiki.debian.org/multiarch .
Thanks.
Ok, if I understood correctly, changes in comparison with what we have now
are:
- A more
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Please take a look at http://wiki.debian.org/multiarch .
Thanks.
--
Robert Millan
My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for
spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.
--
Please take a look at http://wiki.debian.org/multiarch .
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Hi,
Please CC me -- I am not subscribed.
I am in the process of packaging the X driver for the IVTV cards[0] and
I'm wondering about the correct source package name. It seems that the
upstream source is named xf86-video-FOO[1] and that is repacked for
Debian as xserver-xorg-video-FOO[2].
Is
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x
archives but I can't see it.
Purely historical reasons: the binary package is named
xserver-xorg-video-foo to have a clear lineage from xserver-xorg.
I have
Hey man, just ok I had to send you this site, see I ordered a Gold package and
these things work amazingly job!
For real, fresh I've tried a bunch of other ones but they don't work- these
ones are the real deal though stop.
Dreams show you that you have the power...
Check out the site for
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:28:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Ok, if I understood correctly, changes in comparison with what we have now
are:
- A more standarised pathset, instead of just /emul/ia32-linux. According to
http://wiki.debian.org/toolchain-multiarch, there are plans to make
Drew Parsons wrote:
Unfortunately it's happened against, this time with the upload of
xorg-server (xserver-xorg-core) 1:1.1.1-3, accidentally uploaded to
unstable instead of experimental. An easy enough mistake, it's only
one little field in a changelog file.
'2:' is not any worse than '1:',
reassign 382988 kdebase
thanks
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:58:39PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
Hi all,
Could someone give me some clue as to what programs in xbase-config are
segfaulting in this case? I'm digging in to the libxkb* code now, but my
guess is that this is a server
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:19:29PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Patch attached for 32-bit biarch support (lib32sm6 and lib32sm-dev).
(needs lib32ice first)
Um, why don't you focus your energies on proper multiarch support
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 09:13:40AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 09:10 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 23:11 -0400, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin
--- trunk/debian/xorg/debian/local/dexconf2006-08-22 03:04:13 UTC
(rev 2888)
+++
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
Hi,
Please CC me -- I am not subscribed.
I am in the process of packaging the X driver for the IVTV cards[0] and
I'm wondering about the correct source package name. It seems that the
upstream source is named xf86-video-FOO[1]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 382988 kdebase
Bug#382988: No keyboard layout available under kcontrol!
Bug reassigned from package `xbase-clients' to `kdebase'.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-08-22 19:31:43 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2906
Modified:
trunk/xserver/xorg-server-1.0.2/debian/changelog
Log:
* Upload to unstable to fixed messed up last upload which was supposed to go
to experimental. Brown bag o' joy.
Modified:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:42:46PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
The Dear Project Leader wrote:
Yesterday, glibc 2.3.999.2-10 was accidently uploaded to unstable instead
of experimental, and on the request of the release managers, I UNACCEPTed
it, given it was a major accidental change to a
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-08-22 20:11:57 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2907
Modified:
trunk/xserver/xorg-server-1.0.2/debian/changelog
Log:
Increment epoch because I have to
Modified: trunk/xserver/xorg-server-1.0.2/debian/changelog
Package: xserver-xorg-core
Version: 1:1.1.1-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
After doing an apt-get upgrade, X will no longer start and gives an
error message that says the modular driver for radeon is using an outdated
ABI. It appears that the version of
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-08-22 20:37:20 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2908
Added:
tags/xserver/xorg-server/xorg-server-2:1.0.2-10/
Log:
Tag upload of xorg-server-2:1.0.2-10 to unstable
Copied: tags/xserver/xorg-server/xorg-server-2:1.0.2-10 (from rev 2907,
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-08-22 20:44:06 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006)
New Revision: 2909
Modified:
branches/7.1/xserver/xorg-server/debian/changelog
Log:
xserver-xorg-core no longer Depends: xserver-xorg-video-all
| xserver-xorg-video but instead Conflicts: xserver-xorg-video.
The
Your message dated Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:57:49 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#384256: xserver-xorg-core newer than xserver-xorg-video-all
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
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:57:29PM -0400, Bob Hauck wrote:
Package: xserver-xorg-core
Version: 1:1.1.1-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
After doing an apt-get upgrade, X will no longer start and gives an
error message that says the modular driver for radeon is
Package: xorg
Version: 1:7.0.23
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
With the recent update from xserver-xorg-core_1.0.2-9 to
xserver-xorg-core_1%3a1.1.1-3 the ati module fails to load because the
ABI mismatch.
This was in the /var/log/Xorg.0.log:
(II) LoadModule: ati
(II)
Package: xserver-xorg-core
Version: 1:1.1.1-3
Severity: grave
Since the installation of xserver-xorg-core 1:1.1.1-3 almost all fonts
don't get displayed anymore. Reverting to 1:1.0.2-9 solves the problem.
Regards, Ole
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers
Denis Barbier wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:08:49AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Drew Parsons ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060822 11:04]:
2) [technical] Remove the single point of failure by adding a
Distribution: field to debian/control, say. The package will be
rejected if the two
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:10:35PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
Your version requires this line to be deleted for unstable and then
added again for any future experimental work.
I prepared an alternative snippet by which the test can remain, and
switched off by an explicit extra variable
Drew Parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
e.g.
build: test_stable patch build-stamp
instead of
build: patch build-stamp
That would be good to be add in cdbs. I think we might want to have it
more flexible to allow it to work for CDDs too but I liked it very
much :-D
--
O T A V I O
reassign 384263 xserver-xorg-core
found 384263 1:1.1.1-3
close 384263 2:1.0.2-10
quit
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:09:48PM -0500, Jeffrey Hundstad wrote:
With the recent update from xserver-xorg-core_1.0.2-9 to
xserver-xorg-core_1%3a1.1.1-3 the ati module fails to load because the
ABI
Hello everybody,
I recently upgraded Debian/unstable and X stopped working (on two
machines). The error message is:
module ABI major varsion (0) doesn't match the server's version (1)
Failed to load module i810 (module requirement mismatch, 0)
No drivers available.
ANy ideas how this can be
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:57:28PM -0700, Z F wrote:
Hello everybody,
I recently upgraded Debian/unstable and X stopped working (on two
machines). The error message is:
module ABI major varsion (0) doesn't match the server's version (1)
Failed to load module i810 (module requirement
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/22/2006 09:06 AM, Christian Perrier wrote:
I recommend never sendign patches for translation files.
Sorry Christian. Attach you will find the complete potfile.
And sorry for the delay.
And in the meantime, things changed
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 384263 xserver-xorg-core
Bug#384263: ati: module ABI major version (0) doesn't match the server's
version (1)
Bug reassigned from package `xorg' to `xserver-xorg-core'.
found 384263 1:1.1.1-3
Bug#384263: ati: module ABI major version (0)
Subject: xfonts-base: xorg wont start could not open default cursor font
'cursor'
Package: xfonts-base
Version: 1:1.0.0-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
*** Please type your report below this line ***
I did a fresh install of etch using business card disk, installed
tags 384273 unreproducible moreinfo
thanks
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:59:47PM -0400, mlaks wrote:
*** Please type your report below this line ***
I did a fresh install of etch using business card disk, installed
desktop packages.
I then upgraded to sid
from etch. I had a working X initially
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
tags 384273 unreproducible moreinfo
Bug#384273: xfonts-base: xorg wont start could not open default cursor font
'cursor
There were no tags set.
Tags added: unreproducible, moreinfo
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 07:39:17AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:10:54AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:28:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Ok, if I understood correctly, changes in comparison with what we have now
are:
- A more
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:10:54AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:28:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Ok, if I understood correctly, changes in comparison with what we have now
are:
- A more standarised pathset, instead of just /emul/ia32-linux. According
to
73 matches
Mail list logo
