Søren Sandmann writes:
> diff --git a/fb/fbscreen.c b/fb/fbscreen.c
> index 7c7d656..f9080a4 100644
> --- a/fb/fbscreen.c
> +++ b/fb/fbscreen.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ fbCloseScreen(ScreenPtr pScreen)
> int d;
> DepthPtr depths = pScreen->allowedDepths;
>
> +fbDestroyGlyphCache();
>
Hi,
On 7 October 2012 01:58, Chase Douglas wrote:
> Sorry for the delay, I've been trying to think about this to come up
> with a cogent argument.
>
> I don't like the idea of overlapping selections being allowed. There
> are two ways to handle an overlapping selection:
>
> * Only deliver to one
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Peter Hutterer
wrote:
> xserver branches are only for the respective maintainers (keith for master).
> I've picked your patch up and will send a pull request out soon. Please do
> try to get a test for this though.
Thanks - this is now in master.
Could it be appli
Thomas Klausner writes:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 01:46:57PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
>> I did a bunch of experiments with fd passing in Linux to see how it
>> might work in X.
>
> Do you have a test program I could run on NetBSD to see if it works
> there as well?
All of the tests I did are
On 10/06/2012 10:42 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 6 October 2012 12:32, Antoine Martin wrote:
>> On 10/06/2012 05:15 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>
>>> If the user is choosing a port or file path the user then needs to go
>>> through the dances of determining which port or path is still
>>> avail
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Peter Hutterer
wrote:
> On 30/09/12 04:25 , Chase Douglas wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Peter Hutterer
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 06:30:23PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
Given the following scenario:
1) client A sele
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer
> ---
> Urgh, that's what I get for not upstreaming this patch. I wrote this a while
> ago but somehow it never made it to the repo.
>
> src/bsd_mouse.c | 10 ++
> src/hurd_mouse.c | 2 +-
> src/mouse
On 6 October 2012 12:32, Antoine Martin wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 05:15 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> If the user is choosing a port or file path the user then needs to go
>> through the dances of determining which port or path is still
>> available for starting a new X server. This is just moved fr
On 10/06/2012 05:15 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 6 October 2012 12:02, Antoine Martin wrote:
>> On 10/06/2012 04:56 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> What's the advantage of that patch?
>> 1) You can use a socket path you create in advance, so you know for
>> certain that it is free
On 6 October 2012 12:02, Antoine Martin wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 04:56 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> What's the advantage of that patch?
> 1) You can use a socket path you create in advance, so you know for
> certain that it is free when you call the server.
> You then know for certain
On 10/06/2012 04:56 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What's the advantage of that patch?
1) You can use a socket path you create in advance, so you know for
certain that it is free when you call the server.
You then know for certain that this is what will be used by the server,
not some fre
Hello,
What's the advantage of that patch?
As far as I understand the patch shifts the burden of finding a free
port (or socket path) from the X server to the user.
X is in the position to atomically find a free port and grab it
whereas an user from outside of the X server will have much harder
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 01:46:57PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> I did a bunch of experiments with fd passing in Linux to see how it
> might work in X.
Do you have a test program I could run on NetBSD to see if it works there as
well?
Thomas
___
xorg-d
On 10/06/2012 03:46 AM, Keith Packard wrote:
>
> I did a bunch of experiments with fd passing in Linux to see how it
> might work in X.
>
> Here's the results:
>
> http://keithp.com/blogs/fd-passing/
>
> The bottom line is that I think it'll be easy to get fds from
> applications to the
14 matches
Mail list logo
