On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 06:18:23PM +0200, ext Michel Dänzer wrote:
> From: Michel Dänzer
>
> Previously we assumed every pixmap destroyed during a software fallback was
> also created during a software fallback and had access prepared, but that's
> not always true.
>
> Fixes a server abort repor
From: Michel Dänzer
Previously we assumed every pixmap destroyed during a software fallback was
also created during a software fallback and had access prepared, but that's
not always true.
Fixes a server abort reported by 邓逸昕 .
Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer
---
exa/exa.c | 23 ++
On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:52:42 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> I considered that but decided to keep the fix minimal for now.
I'd rather see the code cleaned up; it's not like someone is going to
come back later to fix it, and leaving it as is risks having a bug fixed
in one place at not the other t
On Mit, 2010-07-07 at 14:59 -0400, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 12:38:10 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > From: Michel Dänzer
> >
> > Previously we assumed every pixmap destroyed during a software fallback was
> > also created during a software fallback and had access prepared, but
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 12:38:10 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> From: Michel Dänzer
>
> Previously we assumed every pixmap destroyed during a software fallback was
> also created during a software fallback and had access prepared, but that's
> not always true.
>
> Fixes a server abort reported by 邓逸
From: Michel Dänzer
Previously we assumed every pixmap destroyed during a software fallback was
also created during a software fallback and had access prepared, but that's
not always true.
Fixes a server abort reported by 邓逸昕 .
Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer
Tested-by: 邓逸昕
---
Would be great i
