Your message dated Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:16:18 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#18191: Is this bug still alive??
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Feb 1998 06:17:45 +0000
Received: (qmail 31738 invoked from network); 14 Feb 1998 06:17:40 -0000
Received: from p40.pm3c02.pm.dimcom.net (HELO dres.elam.org) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by debian.novare.net with SMTP; 14 Feb 1998 06:17:40 -0000
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by dres.elam.org (8.8.8/8.8.8/Debian/GNU) id WAA08774;
Fri, 13 Feb 1998 22:53:22 -0700
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 22:53:22 -0700
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: xlib6g: crash in XDestroyImage
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.1.0
Package: xlib6g
Version: 3.3.1-2
I think this is an Xlib problem. Running XDestroyImage on the following
structure causes the backtrace (seen afterward). Is there a debugging
version of the xlibs available (I don't have room to compile it on my system)?
gdb dump of structure:
gdb> print xim
$66 = (XImage *) 0x809c278
gdb> print *xim
$63 = {
width = 48,
height = 48,
xoffset = 0,
format = 2,
data = 0x809b070 "ô½)@ô½)@tedTypeInfo\nXRequest.X3D-PEX.3:
PEX_GetImpDepConstants\nXRequest.X3D-PEX.4:
PEX_CreateLookupTable\nXRequest.X3D-PEX.5:
PEX_CopyLookupTable\nXRequest.X3D-PEX.6:
PEX_FreeLookupTable\nXRequest.X3D-PE"...,
byte_order = 0,
bitmap_unit = 32,
bitmap_bit_order = 0,
bitmap_pad = 8,
depth = 16,
bytes_per_line = 96,
bits_per_pixel = 16,
red_mask = 63488,
green_mask = 2016,
blue_mask = 31,
obdata = 0x0,
f = {
create_image = 0x4004ae00 <XCreateImage>,
destroy_image = 0x4004b050 <XInitImage+192>,
get_pixel = 0x4004b440 <XInitImage+1200>,
put_pixel = 0x4004bad0 <XInitImage+2880>,
sub_image = 0x4004bc90 <XInitImage+3328>,
add_pixel = 0x4004bf00 <_XSetImage+224>
}
}
backtrace:
#0 0x402482ef in free ()
#1 0x40248161 in free ()
#2 0x4004b071 in XInitImage ()
#3 0x40172194 in Imlib_render (id=0x40341008, im=0x809a618, w=48, h=48)
at rend.c:4616
#4 0x804bda4 in LoadPicture (dpy=0x8075e78, Root=37,
path=0x8096040 "/home/dres/lib/images/scwm-pixmaps/unknown1.xpm")
at Picture.c:98
#5 0x804be29 in CachePicture (dpy=0x8075e78, Root=37,
szPath=0x8094e50
"/home/dres/pixmaps:/home/dres/bitmaps:/home/dres/lib/images:/home/dres/lib/images/scwm-pixmaps:/usr/X11/include/X11/bitmaps:/usr/local/X11/include/X11/pixmaps:/usr/local/lib/icons:/uns/include/X11/pix"...,
name=0x8096028 "unknown1.xpm") at Picture.c:181
#6 0x804c038 in make_picture (picture_filename=1077814328) at Picture.c:288
#7 0x400efc9f in scm_deval (x=10612, env=1077814192) at eval.c:2405
#8 0x400e6a0c in scm_eval_car (pair=1077814288, env=1077814192) at eval.c:434
#9 0x400e7705 in scm_m_define (x=1077814376, env=1077814192) at eval.c:880
#10 0x400f08a7 in scm_dapply (proc=107691#0 0x402482ef in free ()
#11 0x400ee195 in scm_deval (x=1077814376, env=1077814192) at eval.c:1996
#12 0x400ec4ac in scm_eval_3 (obj=1077814376, copyp=0, env=1077814192)
at eval.c:3249
#13 0x400ec5a7 in scm_eval_x (obj=1077814376) at eval.c:3289
#14 0x400fe146 in scm_primitive_load (filename=1077127144) at load.c:97
#15 0x400efc9f in scm_deval (x=10612, env=1077119232) at eval.c:2405
#16 0x400e6a0c in scm_eval_car (pair=1076941008, env=1077119232) at eval.c:434
#17 0x4012d8b7 in scm_m_start_stack (exp=1076940936, env=1077119232)
at debug.c:336
#18 0x400f08a7 in scm_dapply (proc=1076921240, arg1=1076940936,
args=1077119232) at eval.c:2805
#19 0x400ee195 in scm_deval (x=1076940936, env=1077119232) at eval.c:1996
#20 0x400f0a5a in scm_dapply (proc=1077120144, arg1=10612, args=1077119384)
at eval.c:2838
#21 0x400eb27e in scm_apply (proc=1077120144, arg1=10612, args=10612)
at eval.c:2675
#22 0x400e50a7 in scm_dynamic_wind (thunk1=1077120016, thunk2=1077120144,
thunk3=1077119976) at dynwind.c:78
#23 0x400efc7d in scm_deval (x=1077039152, env=1077120024) at eval.c:2402
#24 0x400ec4ac in scm_eval_3 (obj=1077131368, copyp=0, env=1077130656)
at eval.c:3249
#25 0x400ec5a7 in scm_eval_x (obj=1077131368) at eval.c#14 0x400fe146 in
scm_primitive_load (filename=1077127144) at load.c:97
#15 0x400efc9f in scm_deval (x=10612, env=1077119232) at eval.c:2405
#16 0x400e6a0c in scm_eval_car (pair=1076941008, env=1077119232) at eval.c:434
#17 0x4012d8b7 in scm_m_start_stack (exp=1076940936, env=1077119232)
at debug.c:336
#18 0x400f08a7 in scm_dapply (proc=107 at strports.c:257
#28 0x400f8c09 in gh_eval_str (
scheme_code=0x806a602 "(let ((home-scwmrc (string-append (getenv
\"HOME\") \"/\" \".scwmrc\")) (system-scwmrc
\"/usr/local/lib/X11/scwm/system.scwmrc\")) (if (access? home-scwmrc R_OK)
(load home-scwmrc) (if (acc"...) at gh_eval.c:55
#29 0x805533b in scwm_main (argc=1, argv=0xbffff2f4) at scwm.c:530
#30 0x400f918d in gh_launch_pad (closure=0x8054ac0, argc=1, argv=0xbffff2f4)
at gh_init.c:61
#31 0x400fbb03 in invoke_main_func (body_data=0xbffff298) at init.c:509
#32 0x40120a05 in scm_internal_catch (tag=9076,
body=0x400fbae0 <invoke_main_func>, body_data=0xbffff298,
handler=0x40120f80 <scm_handle_by_message>, handler_data=0x0)
at throw.c:236
#33 0x400fbab9 in scm_boot_guile_1 (base=0xbffff294, closure=0xbffff298)
at init.c:485
#34 0x400fb839 in scm_boot_guile (argc=1, argv=0xbffff2f4,
main_func=0x400f9170 <gh_launch_pad>, closure=0x8054ac0) at init.c:346
#35 0x400f91c8 in gh_enter (ar at strports.c:257
#28 0x400f8c09 in gh_eval_str (
scheme_code=0x806a602 "(let ((home-scwmrc (string-append (getenv
\"HOME\") \"
I'm adding Imlib support to scwm and the first two times this bit of code
is executed there are no problems, but right after the second time an
XErrorEvent number 16 is recieved (16 being BadLength which my docs say is
often an internal X server error).
Hmm. Let me know if you think this looks like and Xserver/lib problem and
what I can do to help fix it. Hmmm You might want the code that I'm running
to get this, but I figure i'll let you ask before sending something that
large.
Oh, also, this window manager is running against an Xnest entity rather than
the real Xserver.
Dres
--
@James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.dimensional.com/~dres | Linux is cool!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
-- System Information
Debian Release: 2.0 (unstable)
Kernel Version: Linux dres 2.0.28 #2 Wed Feb 19 21:30:20 EST 1997 i586 unknown
Versions of the packages xlib6g depends on:
libc6 Version: 2.0.6-3
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 18191-done) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Jan 2003 00:21:11 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 28 18:21:10 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.lewismoss.org (tigger.lewismoss.net) [4.18.171.42]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18dfyY-000365-00; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:21:10 -0600
Received: from eeyore.lewismoss.net (eeyore.lewismoss.net [192.168.0.5])
by tigger.lewismoss.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 3EF29B7A4; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:20:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dres by eeyore.lewismoss.net with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 18dftr-00024L-00; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:16:19 -0500
To: "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#18191: Is this bug still alive??
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ("H. S. Teoh"'s message of
"Tue, 28 Jan 2003 17:47:59 -0500")
X-Url: http://www.lewismoss.org/~dres
X-Organization: Debian/Software in the Public Interest
X-Face: "R3Ms&!j++.]J8DwisON-l7#S<Jw[MsP|I<K?28b~f-<[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>OloY'V?!^-!2
9G+7Z7OzClzr2{3e<RFn%f*t%B<*|sT->ni9BN\pzkTp<dg6+lOtI-rg*]Fjgr0n.=ChFX:_+T7fKT
*Z[}xvSK"jV~QH7*v}xZ,1rlb+Ro`,)#2Econ*g^>}ehc,\AhKBZ\Sf/HVG+p\*?'(&ct2w6Fr:w9m
o|9R&.D-)1]:&sN-6o'\`7W${f1$2BCy6qSl&._{ILYCZ?X-[?M!](N
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:16:18 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code,
i386-debian-linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.1 required=5.0
tests=IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03,USER_AGENT
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
--
@James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.lewismoss.org/~dres | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
