Your message dated Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:32:56 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#240013: xext wasn't forced off my system
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; 25 Mar 2004 10:39:47 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Mar 25 02:39:47 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mars.mj.nl [81.91.1.49]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1B6SH5-0007Ck-00; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 02:39:47 -0800
Received: (qmail 6985 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2004 10:39:16 -0000
Received: from 81-91-5-95-customer.mjdsl.nl (HELO thanatos) (81.91.5.95)
by www.mj.nl with SMTP; 25 Mar 2004 10:39:16 -0000
Received: by thanatos (Postfix, from userid 1001)
id D981710D678; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:39:13 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: xext wasn't forced off my system
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.48
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:39:13 +0100
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-BadReturnPath: [EMAIL PROTECTED] rewritten as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
using "From" header
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_12
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_12
X-Spam-Level:
Package: xfree86
Severity: normal
I just discovered that xext was still on my system even though
I have installed XFree86 version 4.3 and this package is described
as providing extensions for X version 3. Should it have been
forced off using a Conflict?
What led me to discover this problem (if it is a problem) were
these error messages in my X log file:
(EE) Failed to load /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/pex5.so
(EE) Failed to load module "pex5" (loader failed, 7)
(EE) Failed to load /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/xie.so
(EE) Failed to load module "xie" (loader failed, 7)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (800, 'testing'), (700, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.24
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 240013-done) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Mar 2004 10:32:57 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Mar 27 02:32:57 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from dhcp065-026-182-085.indy.rr.com (redwald.deadbeast.net)
[65.26.182.85]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1B7B7Z-0001Kw-00; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 02:32:57 -0800
Received: by redwald.deadbeast.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id A3F216423D; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:32:56 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:32:56 -0500
From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#240013: xext wasn't forced off my system
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cUjMc5fB5G+GsIM6"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-No-CC: I subscribe to this list; do not CC me on replies.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
--cUjMc5fB5G+GsIM6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 11:39:13AM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote:
> Package: xfree86
> Severity: normal
>=20
> I just discovered that xext was still on my system even though
> I have installed XFree86 version 4.3 and this package is described
> as providing extensions for X version 3. Should it have been
> forced off using a Conflict?
>=20
> What led me to discover this problem (if it is a problem) were
> these error messages in my X log file:
>=20
> (EE) Failed to load /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/pex5.so
> (EE) Failed to load module "pex5" (loader failed, 7)
>=20
> (EE) Failed to load /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/xie.so
> (EE) Failed to load module "xie" (loader failed, 7)
No; it's obsolete, but it doesn't break anything. The above error
messages are not fatal. It's just that XFree86 3.x and 4.x used the
same path for the server's loadable modules. (XFree86 3.x's experiment
with loadable modules was short-lived, though.)
I guess by the same logic I should let people keep xlib6g around.
Sigh.
Closing this report.
--=20
G. Branden Robinson | What influenced me to atheism was
Debian GNU/Linux | reading the Bible cover to cover.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Twice.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- J. Michael Straczynski
--cUjMc5fB5G+GsIM6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkBlWFgACgkQ6kxmHytGonyGDgCfbjgKSP6Rl0IA+/s4r8jP20ry
8HYAoKN6NO6S/ZPMcDZ+FChGev95zzg8
=TKGQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--cUjMc5fB5G+GsIM6--
