Sorry, but I gave my sparc away some months ago, so I can't help you
with this question. But as far as I am concerned you may close the
bug :)
Christopher
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:39:40 +0100
Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> About 2 years ago, you reported a b
http://www.googoo.ru/ - BEST Ch1ld P0rn0 resource and hardware shop!!!
http://www.googoo.ru/?porno_acc=akkpgefo
Your Login: akkpgefo
Your Pass: dyvwuj
Contacts:
ICQ: 617762 - support
ICQ: 62546427 - manager
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Buy our Be
Package: xbase-clients
Version: 1:7.1.ds-2
Severity: important
The entire error is in the subject. This error is generated when
xdriinfo or driconf are called from an Eterm by an unpriveleged user.
Here is the output of ldd /usr/X11R6/bin/xdriinfo
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xe000)
stop won't work anymore.
I think this looks like an upstream bug.
Regards,
Christopher Zimmermann
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell: /bin/s
Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 1:7.0.10
Followup-For: Bug #346098
Success!
I have upgraded to the xorg 7.0 packages in unstable. Middle-clicking
now works.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Sh
Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5
Followup-For: Bug #346098
This bug still exists in dfsg.1-5 as well.
-Chris
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Followup-For: Bug #318004
Hi,
I got the same problem on sparc64.
Christopher
-- Package-specific info:
Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/X.roster:
xserver-xfree86
xserver-xorg
/etc/X11/X target unchanged from checksum in /var/lib/xfree86/X.md5sum.
X
quot;cfb32" modules
manually in the xorg.conf
Load"cfb"
Load"cfb32"
Christopher
-- Package-specific info:
Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/X.roster:
xserver-xfree86
xserver-xorg
/etc/X11/X target unchanged from checksum in /var/lib/xfree86/X.md5sum.
X ser
Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-3
Followup-For: Bug #346098
Just adding my confirmation of the bug to the pile. On my Thinkpad R51
my middle button does not click, even though X reports that it has
parsed the option correctly.
-- Package-specific info:
Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/X.
://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1900
Thanks,
Christopher Martin
On Saturday 17 December 2005 12:14, Christopher Martin wrote:
> Package: xserver-xorg
> Version: 6.8.99.903.dfsg.1-1
> Severity: normal
> Tags: experimental
>
> Debian's X.Org packa
Attached are updated patches that apply to the latest X.Org in unstable.
Cheers,
Christopher Martin
On Sunday 06 November 2005 15:09, Christopher Martin wrote:
> Any chance that the changes I suggested below (in previous posts to this
> bug number) will be reviewed in time to make the
s can of course use xmodmap or the
new ButtonMapping xorg.conf option to work around this. As far as I can
tell, Qt applications seem to use 6 and 7 for horizontal scrolling already,
so they shouldn't generate too many reports of brokenness.
Cheers,
Christopher Martin
I'd also like to
Any chance that the changes I suggested below (in previous posts to this bug
number) will be reviewed in time to make the 6.9.0 release upload? The
problems I describe are still relevant. Let me know if I can supply any
further information, or answer any questions.
Thanks,
Christopher Martin
hough it seems to work in its
current state.
Cheers,
Christopher Martin
twm.desktop
Description: application/desktop
> El lunes, 12 de septiembre de 2005 21:46, Christopher J Peikert escribió:
> > I would also like to ask that the EmulateWheelTimeout option be added.
> > For a thinkpad trackpoint, it is the only convenient way to use the
> > middle button for cut-and-paste.
>
>
s for your work,
Christopher Zimmermann
-- Package-specific info:
Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/X.roster:
xserver-xfree86
/etc/X11/X target unchanged from checksum in /var/lib/xfree86/X.md5sum.
X server symlink status:
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root root 20 Jul 6 16:13 /etc/X11/X -> /usr/bin/X11/XFree86
-rwxr
hese diffs while the X.Org packages are young and
experimental, since this is the perfect time to try these sorts of changes.
I hope you'll apply them.
Thanks,
Christopher Martin
--- xorg.orig/trunk/debian/patches/905_debian_xdm.diff
+++ xorg.patched/trunk/debian/patches/905_debia
ems that way). You are critiquing the general font sizing
system currently in use, and that is fine, but I'm interested in a smaller
and easier "patch-up" for the time being.
Cheers,
Christopher Martin
pgpi31ThoGUep.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ize that many people would object to it, using arguments not without
merit, and so I won't push for such a change today.
Thanks,
Christopher Martin
Please CC me on all replies and follow-ups. I'm not subscribed to debian-x.
pgpuI75Q8VB1U.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: twm
Version: 4.2.1-6
Followup-For: Bug #725
The attached patch fixes this long-standing bug. Please apply before
bug #725 turns 10 years old. :)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture:
Ups, it's not in your sources. I found it in a source tree I patched. It
would still be fine if you could include the patch. Sorry for sending
you wrong information. The patch is on http://aiptektablet.sourceforge.net
Christopher
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:47:51AM -0500, Branden Robinson
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
There is no aiptek driver in the xserver although I can find it in your
sources. The tablet is widely used in germany. So please compile it into
the next release.
Christopher
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Package: xterm
Version: 4.3.0-7
Severity: normal
If I type 'xterm -e su', and then send the resulting window a delete
command using my window manager (twm, doing an f.delete), it will
disappear and xterm exits. However, if I type in the root password
then attempting to delete the window has no ef
I hope this reaches a person, the address looks like a mailing list, and
I'm sure I haven't subscribed...
While trying to apt-get upgrade to 4.3.0-3 off the debian experimental
server I get the following errors:
/tmp/xfree86-common.config.45651: 610: Syntax error: end of file
unexpected (exp
So this evening I've hit the bug - 3 times. I'm not doing anything
special, but I did stumble upon an interesting quark to the problem.
Xine works after the "crash". If I run xclock - I get the the standard:
--- begin paste ---
X Error of failed request: BadLength (poly request too large or
int
> > I also started having this problem just this fall. The tranmetta
> > code-morphing bug is still plausible, but unless Joe's laptop is
> > significantly different from the p2120 a variety of the other components
> > might be at fault.
>
> It seems unlikely to me that we all experienced a
> >
> > Hardware: laptop, Fujitsu lifebook p2120
> > x: 4.3.0-0pre1v5, but I had the same problem with the xserver-xfree86 from
> >sid
The trend continues... I also have a lifebook p2120. However I'm
running xserver-xfree86: 4.2.1-12.1.
> When did you start having the problem? I assume
Hi,
I've been experiencing this exact problem stochastically as well. Often
it seems that mozilla or mozilla-firebird seem to be the application
that breaks X for me. However it isn't always mozilla that is the
culprit so clearly there may be a link, but its not the problem
directly. As a hacki
ERROR: /etc/X11/xkb/xkbcomp exists and is not a symbolic link. This package
cannot be installed until this file is removed.
Aborting installation of xbase-clients package.
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/xbase-clients_4.1.0-16woody1_i386.deb (--unpack):
subprocess pre-installatio
ERROR: /etc/X11/xkb/xkbcomp exists and is not a symbolic link. This package
cannot be installed until this file is removed.
Aborting installation of xbase-clients package.
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/xbase-clients_4.1.0-16woody1_i386.deb (--unpack):
subprocess pre-installation
Package: xfs
Version: 4.2.1-6
Severity: normal
For some reason when I upgraded from some previous version of xfs[*],
and all the non-fixed-width fonts used by twm, mozilla, and pretty
much every other application I use (all non-gnome/kde) became horribly
ugly; it appeared that scalable fonts were
Package: xfs
Version: 4.2.1-6
Severity: normal
For some reason when I upgraded from some previous version of xfs[*],
and all the non-fixed-width fonts used by twm, mozilla, and pretty
much every other application I use (all non-gnome/kde) became horribly
ugly; it appeared that scalable fonts were
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-2
Severity: important
Since the upgrade to X4.2, X is broken.
When it starts up, my monitor turns off, and my PC doesn't react
to input from the keyboard anymore. Using read/get-edid, I've figured
out that the combination of my graphic card and my monitor do
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-2
Severity: important
Since the upgrade to X4.2, X is broken.
When it starts up, my monitor turns off, and my PC doesn't react
to input from the keyboard anymore. Using read/get-edid, I've figured
out that the combination of my graphic card and my monitor d
With any luck, we should be using a newer gcc soon, so this should go away
then. I don't know a time schedule yet, but we'll be going to gcc 3.2,
fyi.
C
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Doug Larrick wrote:
> Due to what appears to be a code generation issue, libttf2
> 1.4pre.20011029-1 and XFree86 4.2 se
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [FYI: you guys KNOW I read debian-x, so take it easy with the private
> CC's.]
My bad. I should've checked the cc list before replying. Sorry :-)
> > Nope, not yet. I've been tied up with other issues (and RL), so the X
> > work has suffered. Do
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [FYI: you guys KNOW I read debian-x, so take it easy with the private
> CC's.]
My bad. I should've checked the cc list before replying. Sorry :-)
> > Nope, not yet. I've been tied up with other issues (and RL), so the X
> > work has suffered. D
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Lars Steinke wrote:
> I wonder if you had time to provide that patch set you mentioned on
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2001/debian-x-200111/msg00033.html
> to Branden yet ? I downloaded a 4.1.99.1 binary package elsewhere and
> found the Mobility Radeon M6 2D support to
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Lars Steinke wrote:
> I wonder if you had time to provide that patch set you mentioned on
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2001/debian-x-200111/msg00033.html
> to Branden yet ? I downloaded a 4.1.99.1 binary package elsewhere and
> found the Mobility Radeon M6 2D support to
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> If they're well-constrained, yes. If someone rolls up and tests a
> patch, then files it as a wishlist bug against xserver-xfree86, it's
> much more likely to happen.
Consider it on my "to-do" list for this weekend :-) Hopefully, the
changes neede
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> If they're well-constrained, yes. If someone rolls up and tests a
> patch, then files it as a wishlist bug against xserver-xfree86, it's
> much more likely to happen.
Consider it on my "to-do" list for this weekend :-) Hopefully, the
changes need
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Roman Beigelbeck wrote:
> Does the latest DEBs of XFree (current version in unstable
> is 4.1.0-9pre10v5) contain the patches for "ATI Mobility Radeon"
> support?
>
> I guess not because I found no information about that in the
> changelog file(s). :-(
Nope, at least not fo
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Roman Beigelbeck wrote:
> Does the latest DEBs of XFree (current version in unstable
> is 4.1.0-9pre10v5) contain the patches for "ATI Mobility Radeon"
> support?
>
> I guess not because I found no information about that in the
> changelog file(s). :-(
Nope, at least not f
On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:15:44PM +0200, Gerhard Tonn wrote:
> > On Sunday 01 July 2001 22:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > Be sure you send me MANIFEST.s390.new, not MANIFEST.s390.
FYI, I'm testing the alpha patches to MANIFEST, et.al now.
On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:15:44PM +0200, Gerhard Tonn wrote:
> > On Sunday 01 July 2001 22:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > Be sure you send me MANIFEST.s390.new, not MANIFEST.s390.
FYI, I'm testing the alpha patches to MANIFEST, et.al now.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Ryan Murray reported to me that a 4.1 compile on mips fails.
>
> This is an update to this issue.
>
> After adding another parameter to RANGE ('0' for pci domain) and
> attempting to compile I ran into a few other problems. First
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Ryan Murray reported to me that a 4.1 compile on mips fails.
>
> This is an update to this issue.
>
> After adding another parameter to RANGE ('0' for pci domain) and
> attempting to compile I ran into a few other problems. First
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> i386 is uploaded. powerpc and sparc are compiling right now.
>
> alpha, arm, and m68k, please compile this for your architectures.
FYI, it will have to wait until a gcc build binary-arch problem is
resolved. Matthias is already working on a fix.
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> i386 is uploaded. powerpc and sparc are compiling right now.
>
> alpha, arm, and m68k, please compile this for your architectures.
FYI, it will have to wait until a gcc build binary-arch problem is
resolved. Matthias is already working on a fix.
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> So, alpha, arm, and m68k, *stop the presses*. You can build this version,
> but it's going to be a little buggy, and it will not be the last one you
> have to build for a while. There will be a 4.0.2-13.
Already built. I'll remove it from incomin
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> So, alpha, arm, and m68k, *stop the presses*. You can build this version,
> but it's going to be a little buggy, and it will not be the last one you
> have to build for a while. There will be a 4.0.2-13.
Already built. I'll remove it from incomi
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> ARCH STATUS
>
> alpha build needed, 4.0.2-11 is current
>
> In short: alpha, arm, and m68k, please build 4.0.2-12. That will be
> sufficient to get 4.0.2-12 into testing.
Not a problem :-) I'll start the build tonight and, if al
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> ARCH STATUS
>
> alpha build needed, 4.0.2-11 is current
>
> In short: alpha, arm, and m68k, please build 4.0.2-12. That will be
> sufficient to get 4.0.2-12 into testing.
Not a problem :-) I'll start the build tonight and, if a
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> 4.0.1-12 will contain only Debian-specific revisions (bugfixes).
I'm preparing an Alpha patch for -11 (and I guess -12) now. I'm test
compiling now and will probably have the final patch later today. Will
this be in time for -12?
C
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> 4.0.1-12 will contain only Debian-specific revisions (bugfixes).
I'm preparing an Alpha patch for -11 (and I guess -12) now. I'm test
compiling now and will probably have the final patch later today. Will
this be in time for -12?
C
--
To UNS
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II wrote:
> Who uses dselect anymore?
Call me "Mr. Stone-age", but I do still use dselect sometimes.
> This is about a package maintianers *duty to
> account for _likely conflicts_.
Ok, this gets me a bit upset. There are always unforeseen (or ju
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II wrote:
> I told the X people months ago not to force out utah - that's why I'm
> pissed off. An overnight upgrade of gtk shouldn't break my x server. I
> also think hiding behind the debian stand-by "it's not even supposed to
> work" is why packa
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II wrote:
> Who uses dselect anymore?
Call me "Mr. Stone-age", but I do still use dselect sometimes.
> This is about a package maintianers *duty to
> account for _likely conflicts_.
Ok, this gets me a bit upset. There are always unforeseen (or j
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II wrote:
> I told the X people months ago not to force out utah - that's why I'm
> pissed off. An overnight upgrade of gtk shouldn't break my x server. I
> also think hiding behind the debian stand-by "it's not even supposed to
> work" is why pack
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others.
> Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha & x86 versions of the
> same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences.
While I've got you here, I've
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
> symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get
> stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They
> have a .dynsym section
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others.
> Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha & x86 versions of the
> same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences.
While I've got you here, I've
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
> symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get
> stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They
> have a .dynsym section
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> wether or not to pass -s to install?
>
> The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the
> symbol & relocation information which is required fo
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> wether or not to pass -s to install?
>
> The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the
> symbol & relocation information which is required f
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [Please follow-up to debian-x if you want me to see it.]
>
> 4.0.1-10 is in the archive for i386, sparc, and powerpc. John Goerzen is
> building for alpha. Compiles for m68k and arm are still needed.
Is John building them? I thought I was! :-) I
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [Please follow-up to debian-x if you want me to see it.]
>
> 4.0.1-10 is in the archive for i386, sparc, and powerpc. John Goerzen is
> building for alpha. Compiles for m68k and arm are still needed.
Is John building them? I thought I was! :-)
Ok, the corresponding packages for Alpha are at:
http://people.debian.org/~chris/xfree86_4.0.1-9pre10v1/
if anyone is interested or if Branden wants to copy them into his
public_html tree...
C
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christo
Ok, the corresponding packages for Alpha are at:
http://people.debian.org/~chris/xfree86_4.0.1-9pre10v1/
if anyone is interested or if Branden wants to copy them into his
public_html tree...
C
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christo
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> I'm working on Alpha now. I have another patch to give to you for Alpha
> that fixes a few 32-bit-isms and a few other problems.
Ok, work done...I'm attaching the diff for Alpha against 9pre10v1.
C
pre10-final-alpha.dif
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> I'm working on Alpha now. I have another patch to give to you for Alpha
> that fixes a few 32-bit-isms and a few other problems.
Ok, work done...I'm attaching the diff for Alpha against 9pre10v1.
C
pre10-final-alpha.diff.gz
> People have been grumbling (rightfully) about the xfree86 package's
> MANIFEST file causing problems.
>
> So in an effort make to sure that people can get debian/*.$(ARCH) files for
> their architecture that will work out of the box for the next release, I've
> made 4.0.1-9pre10v1 available at
> People have been grumbling (rightfully) about the xfree86 package's
> MANIFEST file causing problems.
>
> So in an effort make to sure that people can get debian/*.$(ARCH) files for
> their architecture that will work out of the box for the next release, I've
> made 4.0.1-9pre10v1 available at
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> I talked to Joseph Kain about this, and there is chance that the
> 64-bit branch may actually be folded into trunk, however I'll do the
> merge myself very soon.
Ah, very cool. Thanks!
> However, my current goal is to figure out what the hell is
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> I talked to Joseph Kain about this, and there is chance that the
> 64-bit branch may actually be folded into trunk, however I'll do the
> merge myself very soon.
Ah, very cool. Thanks!
> However, my current goal is to figure out what the hell is
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> > Alpha also needs to build the xfree86v3 source package. It is the
> > only arch other than i386 that needs to do so.
>
> Ok, I'll work on that tomorrow.
Wait a sec...I thought that I did this already (?).
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> alpha:
> I have applied patches from Chris Chimelis that should work; if
> someone could volunteer to keep the package up to date I sure would
> appreciate it. If you do, please subscribe to debian-x.
Ok, already done :-) I don'
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> > Alpha also needs to build the xfree86v3 source package. It is the
> > only arch other than i386 that needs to do so.
>
> Ok, I'll work on that tomorrow.
Wait a sec...I thought that I did this already (?
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> alpha:
> I have applied patches from Chris Chimelis that should work; if
> someone could volunteer to keep the package up to date I sure would
> appreciate it. If you do, please subscribe to debian-x.
Ok, already done :-) I don
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Ralf HECKHAUSEN wrote:
> I installed Debian 2.2 on an AlphaStation 255/233 and everythings works fine,
> but I cannot get X run.
> XF86Setup without using the XF86Config file switches to graphics mode but the
> screen is scambled. It looks as if 8 subsequent bytes in the v
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Ralf HECKHAUSEN wrote:
> I installed Debian 2.2 on an AlphaStation 255/233 and everythings works fine, but I
>cannot get X run.
> XF86Setup without using the XF86Config file switches to graphics mode but the screen
>is scambled. It looks as if 8 subsequent bytes in the vi
701 - 781 of 781 matches
Mail list logo
