Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-14 Thread Julien Cristau
On Wed, May 2, 2007 at 19:34:04 +0200, Brice Goglin wrote: > Joey Hess wrote: > > I do have a useful bit of info though. The crash only happens with my > > old xorg.conf. I let a new one be generated, and blobwars runs ok. > > > > The relevant change seems to be running at 24 bpp. If I switch it

Processed: Re: Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 420402 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10841 Bug#420402: blobwars crashes the X server Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10841. > thank you Stopping processing here.

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-02 Thread Brice Goglin
forwarded 420402 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10841 thank you I have forwarded to bug upstream at the above URL. We'll see if anybody has an idea to debug this. Also, I tried debugging with the coredump method as proposed earlier, it didn't help. Brice -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, em

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-02 Thread Joey Hess
Brice Goglin wrote: > Joey Hess wrote: > > I do have a useful bit of info though. The crash only happens with my > > old xorg.conf. I let a new one be generated, and blobwars runs ok. > > > > The relevant change seems to be running at 24 bpp. If I switch it back > > to 16 I can reproduce the crash

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-02 Thread Brice Goglin
Joey Hess wrote: > I do have a useful bit of info though. The crash only happens with my > old xorg.conf. I let a new one be generated, and blobwars runs ok. > > The relevant change seems to be running at 24 bpp. If I switch it back > to 16 I can reproduce the crash again. > Ok, I can reproduce

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-02 Thread Raúl Sánchez Siles
El Miércoles, 2 de Mayo de 2007, Joey Hess escribió: > How could a core dump backtrace be different or better? > It seems pretty clear that it's jumping the the xf86SigHandler and > losing all prior stack info before that. Well, I can't tell you why a core dump backtrace could be different, but

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-01 Thread Joey Hess
Raúl Sánchez Siles wrote: > That backtrace doesn't seem very meaningful, maybe using a core dump > backtrace would be better. How could a core dump backtrace be different or better? It seems pretty clear that it's jumping the the xf86SigHandler and losing all prior stack info before that. I do

Bug#420402: Getting a better backtrace.

2007-05-01 Thread Raúl Sánchez Siles
Hello: That backtrace doesn't seem very meaningful, maybe using a core dump backtrace would be better. Try to enable core dump and then get the backtrace from there. http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/XserverDebugging has some tips. Thanks -- Raúl Sánchez Siles ->Proud Debian