It seems I have to insist again: patch
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/405256420/patch should definitely really
really be applied. As explained in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-
shell/+bug/1508146/comments/73 that script should really *not* pass
--force to setupcon. There is no rea
But scripts changing between scancode and ascii/unicode (such as for
some terminal emulation, dosbox, etc.) would break. I'm not saying they
are widespread, but I have seen this kind of use, and requiring such
flag will suddenly break them.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
How will kbd_mode know whether it's safe or not?
Adding a -f option to kbd_mode will at best break some *other* existing
scripts, while this very script should really definitely *NOT* pass -f
to setupcon. That is the nonsense which needs to be fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because
That is when updating the console-setup package, yes. As mentioned on
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-
shell/+bug/1508146/comments/73 that's because its config script passes
--force to setupcon, it really shouldn't, as mentioned there
--
You received this bug notification because
Xorg can't do anything about intercepting Alt-key, it's the kernel which
takes the shortcut away.
Again, as mentioned on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source
/console-setup/+bug/520546/comments/66
«
proposed fix:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/console-setup/+bug/520546/+attac
I too believe that Andreas' proposal is the right one. It permits people
who really want the extra 5th level to be able to easily get it, while
not breaking the 99% usual usage.
Just for the record, I had not seen the linuxfr discussion. I guess
mostly only people who would want the extra 5th leve
I too believe that Andreas' proposal is the right one. It permits people
who really want the extra 5th level to be able to easily get it, while
not breaking the 99% usual usage.
Just for the record, I had not seen the linuxfr discussion. I guess
mostly only people who would want the extra 5th leve
Hello,
Until a solution is to be found, could 518c769d be reverted for now?
Breaking the very standard behavior of right control in all applications
(e.g. xterminals!!) is really not acceptable, compared to the few issues
that the behavior has without it.
Samuel
--
You received this bug notific
Hello,
Until a solution is to be found, could 518c769d be reverted for now?
Breaking the very standard behavior of right control in all applications
(e.g. xterminals!!) is really not acceptable, compared to the few issues
that the behavior has without it.
Samuel
--
You received this bug notific
Why should it have to care about screen size? 100% zoom is supposed to
be "app DPI matches screen DPI", it has nothing to do with the whole
screen.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to xserver-xorg-video-intel in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.
Let me disagree: I keep using my laptop either on a 17" monitor, or on a
21" monitor, or on the internal LVDS.
In both 17" and 21" monitor cases, I do want 100% zoom to really mean
100% zoom, so I need correct DPI.
Your reasoning leads to having to modify xorg.conf each time I switch,
which means
Bryce Harrington, le Thu 08 Oct 2009 00:39:09 -, a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 11:46:20PM -0000, Samuel thibault wrote:
> > Bryce Harrington, le Wed 07 Oct 2009 23:31:46 -, a ??crit :
> > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 10:44:02PM -0000, Samuel thibault wrote:
> >
Bryce Harrington, le Wed 07 Oct 2009 23:31:46 -, a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 10:44:02PM -0000, Samuel thibault wrote:
> > Bryce Harrington, le Wed 07 Oct 2009 22:30:13 -, a ??crit :
> > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 10:13:20PM -0000, Samuel thibault wrote:
> >
Bryce Harrington, le Wed 07 Oct 2009 22:30:13 -, a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 10:13:20PM -0000, Samuel thibault wrote:
> > Bryce: please also add a dependency on the console configuration
> > scripts, as while waiting for acpi probably helps to wait for the
> >
Bryce: please also add a dependency on the console configuration
scripts, as while waiting for acpi probably helps to wait for the
console configuration, it'd be better to really make sure gdm doesn't
start before it.
--
[karmic] Xorg 100% CPU utilization -- only after first login
https://bugs.la
Tom Jaeger, le Wed 07 Oct 2009 00:29:13 -, a écrit :
> Samuel thibault wrote:
> > Could people getting the error check /proc/`pidof X`/status? Here I
> > have
> >
> > SigIgn: 10301000
> >
> > The important part is the 3. If the 3 is not ther
Mmm, ok, this can only happen when the ioctl handler is
hung_up_tty_ioctl, i.e. the tty got hung up after Xorg opened it, most
probably because with the parallel start in upstart the console may
get tinkered with after Xorg gets started. After an Xorg restart (or
equivalently, login/logout), no pr
Tom Jaeger, did you actually notice switching VT not working? Could
you get an strace of that happening?
Could people getting the error check /proc/`pidof X`/status? Here I
have
SigIgn: 10301000
The important part is the 3. If the 3 is not there it's normal that
tcflush() return EIO f
18 matches
Mail list logo
