Bug#181724: xserver-xfree86
Package: xserver-xfree86 I upgraded xfree86 from sid to version 4.2.1-5 from -4; I'm using an S3 card: VGA compatible controller: S3 Inc. 86c368 [Trio 3D/2X] (rev 2). Master Capable. Latency=32. Min Gnt=4.Max Lat=255. Non-prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xd400 [0xd7ff]. with the s3virge XFree driver. On the upgrade, two things happened: first, xfree86 started to ignore the /dev/gpmdata driver (I ended up manually configuring it to use /dev/psaux) and, in entering 1024x768, the mode switch would fail; my monitor would go black and a red light would show up indicating an error condition. A lot of upgrades happened - it was an apt-get upgrade to sid, from an earlier sid - but I'm pretty sure it's the X server that's the problem. Any suggestions? -- Rob Bos, [EMAIL PROTECTED],constainia.net}, upstanding atheist "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." -- Carl Sagan pgp39ALCQ8A7u.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181724: Acknowledgement (xserver-xfree86)
Addendum to report: It turns out that my Horiz/Vert timings were off. I consulted my monitor's manual (blew the dust off it, in fact) and noted that the settings that dpkg-reconfigure chose for it were incorrect. They've been incorrect for about a year, but something in the most recent release ran into that bug. -- Rob Bos, [EMAIL PROTECTED],constainia.net}, upstanding atheist "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." -- Carl Sagan pgpg8C3Fr0AK8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#178242: not an issue
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 02:37:08PM -0300, John Lenton scrawled: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:03:16PM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote: > > On Mit, 2003-02-19 at 05:01, Ari Pollak wrote: > > > Neither Red Hat nor Gentoo seem to have reported this problem, even > > > though they both use gcc 3.2. If this is an obscure upsteam bug, it > > > would be a shame to have 4.3.0 released without it having been fixed. > > > > Luckily, the 4.3.0 codebase isn't affected (both my DRI snapshot > > packages and Daniel Stone's 4.2.99.x packages work). > > I might have done something wrong, but to get direct rendering working > on my radeon I have to use both (4.2.99.x with dri-snapshot drm modules). Try installing my xlibmesa4-dri package, and then building the xlibmesa4-drm-src package (again, from my tree). Works for me with my Radeon 9000 ... :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpEVyMbGcRiW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
branden, let's take a step back here. you are a developer. you are a debian developer. you have been working for, i presume, several years on the debian gnu/linux project. you are a responsible developer. therefore please can i respectfully ask you to treat people who have less knowledge than you with an attitude that relates to the responsibility that you have taken on. the reason i ask this is that because you have more knowledge, you are less forgiving of people who are having difficulties with debian, due to lack of knowledge. i love debian's packaging system. however, by _not_ having full information i am in a unique position of being able to advise you of discrepancies and shortcomings that you yoursel, with full information, are blind to. if a very experienced programmer tells you he can't do something and it's getting him down because he feels that getting debian to do what he wants is a bit like pissing blind up a hill, then surely you should consider that maybe something is wrong. _especially_ as you say that there are other people not just myself who have told you that they have also run into exactly the same problem. debian should be _easy_, not require inauguration into a priesthood to recite sourcerous incantations in order for businesses to get the job done. this is the second bug in under a week that i have encountered due to assumptions made by debian maintainers having far more information at their fingertips than they seem to realise, and seeming to think that it is the fault of the users that the users are not drinking enough beer in order to piss harder and further up the hill and to take away their eyesight. due to alcohol poisoning. i shouldn't _have_ to know that i have to look at the package information for a package i don't know exists or is related to the problem. out of all the packages in which information is listed, it did not occur to me to go through xserver-common's package descriptions simply because there are _too many_ such packages for my tiny brain to have considered it worthwhile. i used apt-cache search xfont and it listed dozens of packages, _one_ of which was xserver-common. this _totally_ put me off from going through all of the package descriptions. it's of absolutely no use to man nor beast to have the documentation saying "some other package won't work unless you have this other package installed", the relationship needs to be codified into apt-get / dpkg such that it causes a REAL error message to be displayed on-screen and stops the install process or asks for more input. let me try another tack, here. the reasons why i did not do 1) or 2) below is because no reference in the /var/log/XFree86.0.log said that i should, in order to resolve the problem. you may at your own discretion dismiss this statement if you wish, but its rather obvious ridiculousness should tell you that something is very wrong: namely that the error messages are totally unrelated to the problem and give absolutely fuck-all hint as to what the solution should be. anyway, enough of that. by the way, i do appreciate and value very highly the fact that debian's packaging system does not place great burdens of dependencies on users. i spit upon rpm and its stupid "error you didn't install these 200 packages by hand, first, go away you stupid idiot user". i also note your reference to the meta-package, x-window-system. perhaps the solution is therefore to make some sort of analysis of dependencies. intuition leads me to suggest that it should be possible to track the reverse dependencies back to a meta-package, then to walk forward again and advise that the packages they are about to install will not work unless they do these ones as well, do you want to add these in too, yes or no? xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what you think. if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, then there is a dependency! there is no escaping that simple fact! broke, with-out; not-broke, with. logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! ... but i agree with your analysis and experience in that it is not a DIRECT dependency. the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of saying "this might not work". i believe you might do well to examine NT 5.0 (aka windows 2000)'s security model. in NT 5.0, the concept of "inheriting" ACLs was introduced, whereby all subdirectories "inherit" Access Control Entries that have an "inheritance" bit set on the parent ACL. i believe that the introduction of "dependency inheritance" may provide a framework under which this issue may be resolved. you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, xlibmesa3, xfonts-base,
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 11:50:38PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton scrawled: > [kasnip] > > xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what > you think. > > if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, > then there is a dependency! > > there is no escaping that simple fact! It's perfectly possible to have fonts without xfonts-base: just install xfs on a remote machine. This is what a lot of large labs, etc, do - it centralizes resources. > logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! Yes, but not through xfonts-base. It can be through any mechanism. > the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. Yes. > therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists > must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. No; otherwise we wouldn't need metapackages. > so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only > a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of > saying "this might not work". xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should handle this correctly. > you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, > xlibmesa3, xfonts-base, xfonts-100dpi, xfonts-75dpi, xfonts-scalable, > xbase-clients and xutils. > > it's that xserver-xfree86 CANNOT WORK WITHOUT those packages installed. Nope - it can work without xlibmesa3, without any font packages, without xbase-clients, and without xutils. Who says your fonts and running apps have to be local? > if xserver-xfree86 does not work without x-window-system's group > of packages having been installed, then this needs to be specified. Only thing, it does. > "you are about to install the following package however it is > unlikely to work unless you install one of the following: > x-window-system; y-window-system ..." do you wish to proceed > yes or no. xserver-xfree86, as I said above, recommends that you install xfonts-base, through its Recommends: xfonts-base relationship. > if you believe that xserver-xfree86 is _not_ dependent upon > xfonts-base, then why is it possible to install xserver-xfree86 > at all when neither the meta package x-window-system nor > x-window-system-core nor the real package xfonts-base is > not installed? Because you can still have a flawlessly working X system without it? Hell, you could run KDE if you liked. > if x-window-system is a meta-package that installs > xserver-xfree86, what is the equivalent package to > x-window-system that gets xserver-mach32 installed, or > xserver-svga installed? AFAIK, there is none for the XFree86 3.3.x servers; such is life. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgp764v5VTZOA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:06:38PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 11:50:38PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > scrawled: > > [kasnip] > > > > xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what > > you think. > > > > if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, > > then there is a dependency! > > > > there is no escaping that simple fact! > > It's perfectly possible to have fonts without xfonts-base: just install > xfs on a remote machine. This is what a lot of large labs, etc, do - it > centralizes resources. yes, i did that: i installed xfs (on the local machine). i am impressed that xfs can do remote fonts, that had not occurred to me. > > logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! > > Yes, but not through xfonts-base. It can be through any mechanism. [i understand: i didn't mention that i had installed xfs i left that out in order to keep the report shorter] > > the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. > > Yes. > > > therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists > > must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. > > No; otherwise we wouldn't need metapackages. > > > so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only > > a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of > > saying "this might not work". > > xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should > handle this correctly. apt-get did not. i use neither dselect nor aptitude, they are curses / GUI based and therefore confusing to me. > > you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, > > xlibmesa3, xfonts-base, xfonts-100dpi, xfonts-75dpi, xfonts-scalable, > > xbase-clients and xutils. > > > > it's that xserver-xfree86 CANNOT WORK WITHOUT those packages installed. > > Nope - it can work without xlibmesa3, without any font packages, without > xbase-clients, and without xutils. Who says your fonts and running apps > have to be local? i understand this: i installed xfs, and xfstt, and xfont-100dpi, and xfont-this-and-that, and a whole load of other stuff that i forget now. in fact everything _but_ xfonts-base because it disappeared in the list of apt-cache search xfonts. > > if xserver-xfree86 does not work without x-window-system's group > > of packages having been installed, then this needs to be specified. > > Only thing, it does. ... how?? > > "you are about to install the following package however it is > > unlikely to work unless you install one of the following: > > x-window-system; y-window-system ..." do you wish to proceed > > yes or no. > > xserver-xfree86, as I said above, recommends that you install > xfonts-base, through its Recommends: xfonts-base relationship. then why did apt-get not advise me of that recommendation, note that it is not installed, and ask me if i wanted to add it to the list of packages to install? also, xfs i note does not have such a Recommends: xfonts-base. > > if you believe that xserver-xfree86 is _not_ dependent upon > > xfonts-base, then why is it possible to install xserver-xfree86 > > at all when neither the meta package x-window-system nor > > x-window-system-core nor the real package xfonts-base is > > not installed? > > Because you can still have a flawlessly working X system without it? > Hell, you could run KDE if you liked. ick! :) the following command doesn't even work if you don't have xfonts-base: XFree86 -configfile /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 the following command _also_ does not work if you do not have xfonts-base: xf86cfg yes i had installed xfs, and hand-edited the config file to include "unix/:7100". no this did not fix the problem. > > if x-window-system is a meta-package that installs > > xserver-xfree86, what is the equivalent package to > > x-window-system that gets xserver-mach32 installed, or > > xserver-svga installed? > > AFAIK, there is none for the XFree86 3.3.x servers; such is life. ah, well :) but you appreciate why i mention it? let's assume that an x-window-system-mach32 exists etc. which depends on xserver-X wher X is the same as x-window-system- surely this is painful, and because it is painful this issue has not been fixed? -- -- this message is private, confidential, and is intented for the specified recipients only. if you received in error, altered, deleted, modified, destroyed or interfered with the contents of this message, in whole or in part, please inform the sender (that's me), immediately. if you, the recipient, reply to this message, and do not then receive a response, please consider your reply to have been lost or deliberately destroyed: i *always* acknowledge personal email received. please therefore take appropriate action and use appropriate protocols to ensure effective communication. thank you.
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
okay, how about this as a solution. the debconf / apt xserver configuration performs a detection that xfree86 has failed (runs it). then it checks the configuration and the fonts options and then asks, based on that information, "it has been noted that [you do not have xfonts-base installed], nor [do you have xfs installed]. your system is unlikely to work without access to fonts. what do you want to do? - add an extra line to your xf86config to use xfs on a remote server - install xfs or some local fonts later - install xfs locally, now - install xfonts-base and some other fonts, now. - sort things out yourself, later. " ? -- -- this message is private, confidential, and is intented for the specified recipients only. if you received in error, altered, deleted, modified, destroyed or interfered with the contents of this message, in whole or in part, please inform the sender (that's me), immediately. if you, the recipient, reply to this message, and do not then receive a response, please consider your reply to have been lost or deliberately destroyed: i *always* acknowledge personal email received. please therefore take appropriate action and use appropriate protocols to ensure effective communication. thank you.
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:06:17AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > okay, how about this as a solution. > > the debconf / apt xserver configuration performs a detection > that xfree86 has failed (runs it).
geometry for ibook2
Hi X-Folks,
I've written an geometry file for the apple ibook2.
Included is the patch to the xkb directory of the actual
xlibs package in sid. I hope it will be useful to a bunch
of beginners. I'm not subscribed to the list, so If you
like to hear from me, cc to me.
Eric Böse-Wolf
diff -uNr xkb.orig/geometry/ibook2 xkb.new/geometry/ibook2
--- xkb.orig/geometry/ibook2 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ xkb.new/geometry/ibook2 2003-02-18 16:54:08.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,173 @@
+// $XFree86: xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/macintosh,v 1.1 1999/05/23 05:27:50 dawes Exp $
+default xkb_geometry "ibook2" {
+
+description= "ibook2";
+width= 277;
+height= 110;
+
+shape.cornerRadius= 1;
+shape "NORM" { { [ 18,18] }, { [2,1], [ 16,17] } };
+shape "ALPHA" { { [ 18,9] }, { [2,0.5], [ 16,8] } };
+shape "SPCL" { { [ 18.5,20] }, { [2,1], [ 17, 19] } };
+shape "META" { { [ 22,20] }, { [2,1], [ 21, 19] } };
+shape "BKSP" { { [ 29.2,18] }, { [2,1], [ 28,17] } };
+
+shape "TAB" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "BKSL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+
+shape "RTRN" { { [ 0,0], [19,0], [19,37], [4,37], [4,18], [0,18] },
+ { [ 1,0.5], [18,0.5], [18,36], [5,36], [5,17], [1,17] } };
+
+shape "CAPS" { { [ 32,18] }, { [2,1], [ 30,17] } };
+shape "LCTL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "LALT" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "LFSH" { { [ 23.6,18] }, { [2,1], [ 22,17] } };
+shape "RCTL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "RALT" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "RTSH" { { [ 43,18] }, { [2,1], [ 42,17] } };
+shape "SPCE" { { [92.8,20] }, { [2,1], [91.8,19] } };
+shape "KP0" { { [ 37,18] }, { [2,1], [ 35,17] } };
+shape "KPEN" { { [ 18,37] }, { [2,1], [ 16,36] } };
+
+shape "LEDS" { cornerRadius= 0, { [ 76 ,20 ] } };
+shape "LED" { cornerRadius= 0, { [ 5, 1 ] } };
+
+//solid "LedPanel" {
+// shape= "LEDS";
+// top= 52;
+// left= 375;
+//};
+
+//indicator.onColor= "green";
+//indicator.offColor= "green30";
+//indicator.top= 67;
+//indicator.shape= "LED";
+//indicator "NumLock" { left= 379; };
+// indicator "CapsLock"{ left= 404; };
+//indicator "ScrollLock" { left= 429; };
+text.top= 95;
+text.color= "black";
+text "FN" { left= 9; text="FN"; };
+// text "CapsLockLabel" { left= 403; text="Caps\nLock"; };
+// text "ScrollLockLabel" { left= 428; text="Scroll\nLock"; };
+
+section.left= 0;
+row.left= 1;
+key.shape= "NORM";
+key.gap= 0.7;
+
+section "Function" {
+ top= 2;
+ row {
+ top= 1;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 9.7, },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 10.4, },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 11.9, }
+ };
+ };
+}; // End of "Function" section
+
+section "Alpha" {
+ top= 12;
+ row {
+ top= 1;
+ keys { , , , , ,
+ , , , , ,
+ , , , { , "BKSP" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 20;
+ keys { { , "TAB" }, , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , , , { , "RTRN" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 39;
+ keys { { , "CAPS" }, , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , ,
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 58;
+ keys { { , "LFSH" }, , , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , { , "RTSH" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 77;
+ keys { { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "META" },
+ { , "SPCE" },
+ { , "META" },
+ { , "SPCL" }
+ };
+ };
+}; // End of "Alpha" section
+
+section "Editing" {
+ top= 12;
+ left= 216.7;
+// row {
+// top= 1;
+// keys { , , };
+// };
+//row {
+// top= 20;
+// keys { , , };
+// };
+ row {
+ top= 77;
+ left= 19.65;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" } };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 87;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" },
+ { , "ALPHA" },
+ { , "ALPHA" } };
+ };
+}; // End of "Editing" section
+//
+//// Begin of "Keypad" section
+//section "Keypad" {
+// top= 91;
+// left= 375;
+// row {
+// top= 1;
+//keys { , , , };
+// };
+//row {
+// top= 20;
+// keys { , , , };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 39;
+// keys { , , , };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 58;
+// keys { , , , { , "KPEN" } };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 77;
+// keys { { , "KP0" }, };
+// };
+//}; // End of "Keypad" section
+
+}; // End of "default" geometry
diff -uNr xkb.orig/geometry.dir xkb.new
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 10:55:47AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:06:38PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should > > handle this correctly. > apt-get did not. No, apt-get is an expert's tool, it's not designed for use by the casual hacker. If you don't know what you're doing, you should stick with aptitude or dselect (preferably aptitude). Otherwise you're going to have this sort of problem over and over again. > i use neither dselect nor aptitude, they are curses / GUI based and > therefore confusing to me. No, both can be used from the command-line like apt-get. The curses-based interface is purely optional. In fact, aptitude can be used as an exact replacement for apt-get. It has all the same commands, plus a few new (and useful) ones. The main difference is that aptitude is smarter, and installs recommended and suggested packages (at least by default -- I configured my copy to ignore suggestions). Also aptitude can remember which packages have been installed as dependencies, so you can say "aptitude install kde", and it will install all 400 KDE-related packages, and if you decide you don't like kde, you can say "aptitude remove kde" and all 400 packages will go away. That feature alone (which dselect does not have) makes aptitude worth the price of admission to me. > surely this is painful, and because it is painful > this issue has not been fixed? It's only painful for those who refuse to use the tools that make it easy. If you insist on using apt-get, when you obviously *don't* know enough to use it properly, expect no sympathy from anyone. Apt-get requires that you check for recommendations manually. If you're not willing to do that, don't use apt-get. It's just that simple. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra-osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico-to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 06:16:24AM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: chris, thanks for responding. i acknowledge and understand what you are saying about aptitude. if i had known that it existed, and had a command-line-only interface, i would have investigated and possibly even used it well before now. i have been using debian for a number of years, now, and i am puzzled that i have not come across aptitude before now. (perhaps this is because i have been using debian before aptitude existed? the man page is dated 9/8/00...?) i _did_ know of dselect and don't like it, it is _way_ too confusing and terse: keystrokes are invisible and it is impossible to find out what they are. pine at least has at the bottom of its display two lines of context-sensitive options that allow you to see at a glance what keys do what (ah ha! i note that aptitude does! great!) i always worry about pressing the wrong keys with dselect, and have long since stopped using it. i have now installed aptitude and will investigate it. [hey it looks interesting, esp. the "Tasks" which has a description portion at the bottom of the screen. it still looks a little terse and presents a frightening large list of packages at you. is there a search option like apt-cache search? ] > > surely this is painful, and because it is painful > > this issue has not been fixed? > > It's only painful for those who refuse to use the tools that make it > easy. If you insist on using apt-get, when you obviously *don't* know > enough to use it properly, expect no sympathy from anyone. Apt-get > requires that you check for recommendations manually. If you're not > willing to do that, don't use apt-get. It's just that simple. chris, i have to say this: this is amazing. literally EVERY developer who has responded on this and the other bug i raised last week has said something along the lines of: "you seem to have problem A. several people including yourself have encountered problem A before, and it is becoming boring and monotonous to hear yet another report about people fixing A by trying Y. you do not know what you are doing if you have tried Y. if you knew what you were doing, you would do it like X." where there is a complete lack of comprehension and appreciation for the simple fact that it is NOT POSSIBLE to obtain ANY hints as to the relationship between A and X by trying to do Y, and Y failing to resolve A. almost EVERY response i have received so far on bugs reported fits into this template. in your paragraph above as an example, i DID NOT KNOW that apt-get falls into category Y because i have been using it ever since i started using debian, three maybe four years ago and i DID NOT KNOW that aptitude even existed and falls into category X to solve A. my question to all of you, the knowledgeable and experienced debian developers, is: can you appreciate that there must be something wrong, here, if someone who has been using debian for years gets into difficulties due to lack of information? imagine then how difficult it must be for someone who is new to debian, like my brother dan, to recover from quite simple mistakes. (dan asked dselect to use gnome, then removed gnome, and then needed to upgrade an independent package: for _some_ as yet unidentified reason the error about dselect wanting to use gnome caused dselect, and apt, to not be able to proceed on the other removes-and-installs). l. p.s. i do hope that something positive comes out of all these messages. if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other people like my brother and my friends to be able to use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped it _several_ emails ago.
Processed: Re: Bug#181724: Acknowledgement (xserver-xfree86)
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 181724 xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor > tolerances Bug#181724: xserver-xfree86 Changed Bug title. > tag 181724 + moreinfo Bug#181724: xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor tolerances There were no tags set. Tags added: moreinfo > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#181724: Acknowledgement (xserver-xfree86)
retitle 181724 xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor tolerances tag 181724 + moreinfo thanks On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:33:30PM -0800, Rob Bos wrote: > Addendum to report: It turns out that my Horiz/Vert timings were off. > I consulted my monitor's manual (blew the dust off it, in fact) and > noted that the settings that dpkg-reconfigure chose for it were > incorrect. They've been incorrect for about a year, but something in > the most recent release ran into that bug. Can you please supply this bug with the information requested in the XF86Config(7) manual page? Also, I'm not sure what the problem could be, given that there were no changes to the s3virge driver between 4.2.1-4 and -5. Perhaps the new GCC 3.2 toolchain impacted floating point math somehow; I'm really not sure. -- G. Branden Robinson| A fundamentalist is someone who Debian GNU/Linux | hates sin more than he loves [EMAIL PROTECTED] | virtue. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- John H. Schaar pgpSEubrLP1vh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:42:08AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > ... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because > it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install > "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? Debconf scripts do not have a good way of knowing what is or is not going to be installed in the future. They can only check to see what is installed on the filesystem when they run, which might not have very much to do with what is installed a few minutes later. Note that debconf "preconfiguration" means this is the case quite frequently; all debconf questions are asked *before* packages are installed to the filesystem. -- G. Branden Robinson| One man's "magic" is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | engineering. "Supernatural" is a [EMAIL PROTECTED] | null word. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Robert Heinlein pgpyRJes86uxS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other > people like my brother and my friends to be able to > use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), > i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped > it _several_ emails ago. It appears to me that, among other things, you did not read the woody Release Notes, which do in fact discuss xfonts-base. -- G. Branden Robinson| That's the saving grace of humor: Debian GNU/Linux | if you fail, no one is laughing at [EMAIL PROTECTED] | you. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- A. Whitney Brown pgprWNpJRHwDe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:08:36AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other > > people like my brother and my friends to be able to > > use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), > > i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped > > it _several_ emails ago. > > It appears to me that, among other things, you did not read the woody > Release Notes, which do in fact discuss xfonts-base. no! didn't know _those_ existed either *grin*. this is all about communication. of all the advice i have received, which i _really_ really appreciate, not one single bit of it could i have found without all your (collective) help. basically, the debian project is seriously lacking a glossary, index and reference knowledge base. even if such things do already exist, they exist in places that require knowledge in order to find _out_ that they exist. and most of that knowledge is in people's heads: if you're not hooked into the mailing lists, mindset and culture, it's almost impossible to fix problems on your own. most ordinary users can deal with less dimensions and have a lot less technically-aware creativity to spare than developers do... l.
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:04:25AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:42:08AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > ... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because > > it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install > > "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? > > Debconf scripts do not have a good way of knowing what is or is not > going to be installed in the future. They can only check to see what is > installed on the filesystem when they run, which might not have very > much to do with what is installed a few minutes later. (can the list of packages presently requested to be installed be easily made available to the debconf scripts, such that the packages both before and after batch installation may be compared?) > Note that > debconf "preconfiguration" means this is the case quite frequently; all > debconf questions are asked *before* packages are installed to the > filesystem. ah. okay. well it was worth a shot! so the only viable option left is as part of a post-install analysis, to put up a warning saying "error, you have a package installed that is unlikely to work! install one of the "recommended" packages to make this package useable". a bit like the advice from potato 2.2 from dselect which said "pick a front-end; you can easily change the dselect front-end at a later date" ... but in a similar fashion to this problem, that advice didn't say _how_ you should "easily change the dselect front-end in future" :) l.
Bug#178242: not an issue
On Don, 2003-02-20 at 04:02, Ari Pollak wrote: > You should have the latest versions of the DRM kernel modules, but you > especially need the xlibmesa4-dri package, or else you'll get weird > problems like XFree86.0.log saying Direct rendering is enabled, but > glxinfo saying direct rendering is disabled. Is it really weird that direct rendering doesn't work when the 3D driver is missing? :) -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
Bug#181815: xlibs: Problem with XRenderCompositeText16 in Render extension
Package: xlibs
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: important
Tags: patch upstream sid
Hello Branden,
Mozilla Xft users (including myself) have been experiencing strange
disappearing text problem, as explained in Mozilla Bugzilla "Bug
#187377: Characters disappear with xft if fallback triggered twice on
the same line" and related bug reports. See:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=187377
Most bug reporters use Debian or FreeBSD. This problem does not happen
on Red Hat 8.0. I guess not many people know the fix yet.
The details of this bug came up on the XFree86 fonts mailing list just
two days ago:
ITO Tsuyoshi says:
While performing some test about Mozilla Bugzilla Bug #187377 [1], I
found that XRenderCompositeText16 function in Render extension does
not draw text as intended when multiple glyphsets are involved in one
call.
According to the code of the Render extension on X server side,
XRenderCompositeText16 should send a "glyphset-switch sign" (a glyph
element with len = 0xff) to the X server when it encounters a glyph
element whose glyphset is different from the one of the previous glyph
element. However, it actually sends the glyphset-switch sign when it
encounters a glyph element whose glyphset is different from the one of
the _first_ glyph element. XRenderCompositeText{8,32} probably have
the same problem.
and provided a patch. Keith Packard replied:
Your analysis is quite correct. A fix solving this issue was placed in
XFree86 CVS on 2002-8-31.
That patch was also included in Red Hat 8.0, probably days before it
was final:
* Sun Sep 01 2002 Mike A. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 4.2.0-70
...
- Added XFree86-4.2.0-libXrender-bugfix.patch to fix showstopper (#73243)
That patch (still identical to the one in current XFree86-4.3 CVS) is
attached. Please include this in your next upload. (Feel free to change
the "094_" number. :-)
Thanks!
Anthony
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux anthony 2.4.21-pre4-ac1 #1 Mon Feb 3 03:11:48 HKT 2003 i686
Versions of packages xlibs depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.1-12 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libfreetype6 2.1.3-10 FreeType 2 font engine, shared lib
ii xfree86-common4.2.1-5X Window System (XFree86) infrastr
-- no debconf information
Index: lib/Xrender/Glyph.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -p -r1.7 -r1.10
--- xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c 2001/12/27 01:16:00 1.7
+++ xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c 2002/08/31 18:15:45 1.10
@@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ XRenderFreeGlyphs (Display *dpy,
GetReq(RenderFreeGlyphs, req);
req->reqType = info->codes->major_opcode;
req->renderReqType = X_RenderFreeGlyphs;
+req->glyphset = glyphset;
len = nglyphs;
SetReqLen(req, len, len);
len <<= 2;
@@ -390,6 +391,7 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
{
XExtDisplayInfo *info = XRenderFindDisplay (dpy);
xRenderCompositeGlyphs8Req *req;
+GlyphSet glyphset;
long len;
long elen;
xGlyphElt *elt;
@@ -419,10 +421,17 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
*/
len = 0;
+glyphset = elts[0].glyphset;
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
{
- if (elts[i].glyphset != req->glyphset)
+ /*
+ * Check for glyphset change
+ */
+ if (elts[i].glyphset != glyphset)
+ {
+ glyphset = elts[i].glyphset;
len += (SIZEOF (xGlyphElt) + 4) >> 2;
+ }
nchars = elts[i].nchars;
/*
* xGlyphElt must be aligned on a 32-bit boundary; this is
@@ -434,26 +443,24 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
}
req->length += len;
-/*
- * If the entire request does not fit into the remaining space in the
- * buffer, flush the buffer first.
- */
-if (dpy->bufptr + (len << 2) > dpy->bufmax)
- _XFlush (dpy);
-
+/*
+ * Send the glyphs
+ */
+glyphset = elts[0].glyphset;
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
{
/*
* Switch glyphsets
*/
- if (elts[i].glyphset != req->glyphset)
+ if (elts[i].glyphset != glyphset)
{
+ glyphset = elts[i].glyphset;
BufAlloc (xGlyphElt *, elt, SIZEOF (xGlyphElt));
elt->len = 0xff;
elt->deltax = 0;
elt->deltay = 0;
- Data32(dpy, &elts[i].glyphset, 4);
+ Data32(dpy, &glyphset, 4);
}
nchars = elts[i].nchars;
xDst = elts[i].xOff;
@@ -461,15 +468,17 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
chars = elts[i].chars;
while (nchars)
{
+ int this_chars = nchars > MAX_8 ? MAX_8 : nchars;
+
BufAlloc (xGlyphElt *, elt, SIZEOF(xGlyphElt))
- elt->len = nchars > MAX_8 ? MAX_8 : nchars;
+ elt->len = this_chars;
elt->deltax = xDst;
elt->deltay = yDst;
xDst = 0;
yDst = 0;
- Data (dpy, chars, elt->len);
- nchars -= elt->len;
-
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton scrawled: > i _did_ know of dselect and don't like it, it is _way_ too > confusing and terse: keystrokes are invisible and it is > impossible to find out what they are. Every time you start dselect and go to the select packages section, it tells you this. Every time. > is there a search option like apt-cache search? Use the '/' key. > "you seem to have problem A. > > several people including yourself have encountered problem A > before, and it is becoming boring and monotonous to hear > yet another report about people fixing A by trying Y. > > you do not know what you are doing if you have tried Y. > > if you knew what you were doing, you would do it like X." > > where there is a complete lack of comprehension and appreciation > for the simple fact that it is NOT POSSIBLE to obtain ANY > hints as to the relationship between A and X by trying to > do Y, and Y failing to resolve A. apt-cache show xserver-xfree86 | egrep ^Recommends: > in your paragraph above as an example, i DID NOT KNOW that > apt-get falls into category Y because i have been using it > ever since i started using debian, three maybe four years ago > and i DID NOT KNOW that aptitude even existed and falls into > category X to solve A. Well, apt-get isn't designed to be used by end-users, really. That's why dselect, aptitude, and the now-tanked deity exist(ed). These provide a nice, consistent interface, with proper handling of Recommends, et al. > my question to all of you, the knowledgeable and experienced > debian developers, is: > >can you appreciate that there must be something wrong, >here, if someone who has been using debian for years >gets into difficulties due to lack of information? As I'm not a Developer per se, I'll claim the 5th on this one. ;) > imagine then how difficult it must be for someone who is > new to debian, like my brother dan, to recover from quite > simple mistakes. He'd probably be using dselect, or aptitude. > (dan asked dselect to use gnome, then removed gnome, and > then needed to upgrade an independent package: for _some_ > as yet unidentified reason the error about dselect wanting > to use gnome caused dselect, and apt, to not be able to > proceed on the other removes-and-installs). You probably should be consistent with the tools you use to manage your packages. :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpgjyMzpwgDJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
branden, let's take a step back here. you are a developer. you are a debian developer. you have been working for, i presume, several years on the debian gnu/linux project. you are a responsible developer. therefore please can i respectfully ask you to treat people who have less knowledge than you with an attitude that relates to the responsibility that you have taken on. the reason i ask this is that because you have more knowledge, you are less forgiving of people who are having difficulties with debian, due to lack of knowledge. i love debian's packaging system. however, by _not_ having full information i am in a unique position of being able to advise you of discrepancies and shortcomings that you yoursel, with full information, are blind to. if a very experienced programmer tells you he can't do something and it's getting him down because he feels that getting debian to do what he wants is a bit like pissing blind up a hill, then surely you should consider that maybe something is wrong. _especially_ as you say that there are other people not just myself who have told you that they have also run into exactly the same problem. debian should be _easy_, not require inauguration into a priesthood to recite sourcerous incantations in order for businesses to get the job done. this is the second bug in under a week that i have encountered due to assumptions made by debian maintainers having far more information at their fingertips than they seem to realise, and seeming to think that it is the fault of the users that the users are not drinking enough beer in order to piss harder and further up the hill and to take away their eyesight. due to alcohol poisoning. i shouldn't _have_ to know that i have to look at the package information for a package i don't know exists or is related to the problem. out of all the packages in which information is listed, it did not occur to me to go through xserver-common's package descriptions simply because there are _too many_ such packages for my tiny brain to have considered it worthwhile. i used apt-cache search xfont and it listed dozens of packages, _one_ of which was xserver-common. this _totally_ put me off from going through all of the package descriptions. it's of absolutely no use to man nor beast to have the documentation saying "some other package won't work unless you have this other package installed", the relationship needs to be codified into apt-get / dpkg such that it causes a REAL error message to be displayed on-screen and stops the install process or asks for more input. let me try another tack, here. the reasons why i did not do 1) or 2) below is because no reference in the /var/log/XFree86.0.log said that i should, in order to resolve the problem. you may at your own discretion dismiss this statement if you wish, but its rather obvious ridiculousness should tell you that something is very wrong: namely that the error messages are totally unrelated to the problem and give absolutely fuck-all hint as to what the solution should be. anyway, enough of that. by the way, i do appreciate and value very highly the fact that debian's packaging system does not place great burdens of dependencies on users. i spit upon rpm and its stupid "error you didn't install these 200 packages by hand, first, go away you stupid idiot user". i also note your reference to the meta-package, x-window-system. perhaps the solution is therefore to make some sort of analysis of dependencies. intuition leads me to suggest that it should be possible to track the reverse dependencies back to a meta-package, then to walk forward again and advise that the packages they are about to install will not work unless they do these ones as well, do you want to add these in too, yes or no? xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what you think. if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, then there is a dependency! there is no escaping that simple fact! broke, with-out; not-broke, with. logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! ... but i agree with your analysis and experience in that it is not a DIRECT dependency. the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of saying "this might not work". i believe you might do well to examine NT 5.0 (aka windows 2000)'s security model. in NT 5.0, the concept of "inheriting" ACLs was introduced, whereby all subdirectories "inherit" Access Control Entries that have an "inheritance" bit set on the parent ACL. i believe that the introduction of "dependency inheritance" may provide a framework under which this issue may be resolved. you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, xlibmesa3, xfonts-base,
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 11:50:38PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton scrawled: > [kasnip] > > xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what > you think. > > if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, > then there is a dependency! > > there is no escaping that simple fact! It's perfectly possible to have fonts without xfonts-base: just install xfs on a remote machine. This is what a lot of large labs, etc, do - it centralizes resources. > logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! Yes, but not through xfonts-base. It can be through any mechanism. > the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. Yes. > therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists > must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. No; otherwise we wouldn't need metapackages. > so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only > a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of > saying "this might not work". xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should handle this correctly. > you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, > xlibmesa3, xfonts-base, xfonts-100dpi, xfonts-75dpi, xfonts-scalable, > xbase-clients and xutils. > > it's that xserver-xfree86 CANNOT WORK WITHOUT those packages installed. Nope - it can work without xlibmesa3, without any font packages, without xbase-clients, and without xutils. Who says your fonts and running apps have to be local? > if xserver-xfree86 does not work without x-window-system's group > of packages having been installed, then this needs to be specified. Only thing, it does. > "you are about to install the following package however it is > unlikely to work unless you install one of the following: > x-window-system; y-window-system ..." do you wish to proceed > yes or no. xserver-xfree86, as I said above, recommends that you install xfonts-base, through its Recommends: xfonts-base relationship. > if you believe that xserver-xfree86 is _not_ dependent upon > xfonts-base, then why is it possible to install xserver-xfree86 > at all when neither the meta package x-window-system nor > x-window-system-core nor the real package xfonts-base is > not installed? Because you can still have a flawlessly working X system without it? Hell, you could run KDE if you liked. > if x-window-system is a meta-package that installs > xserver-xfree86, what is the equivalent package to > x-window-system that gets xserver-mach32 installed, or > xserver-svga installed? AFAIK, there is none for the XFree86 3.3.x servers; such is life. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne msg05885/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:06:38PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 11:50:38PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton scrawled: > > [kasnip] > > > > xserver-xfree86 _definitely_ depends on xfonts-base, despite what > > you think. > > > > if xserver-xfree86 doesn't work without xfonts-base installed, > > then there is a dependency! > > > > there is no escaping that simple fact! > > It's perfectly possible to have fonts without xfonts-base: just install > xfs on a remote machine. This is what a lot of large labs, etc, do - it > centralizes resources. yes, i did that: i installed xfs (on the local machine). i am impressed that xfs can do remote fonts, that had not occurred to me. > > logical inescapable conclusion: xserver needs fonts! > > Yes, but not through xfonts-base. It can be through any mechanism. [i understand: i didn't mention that i had installed xfs i left that out in order to keep the report shorter] > > the dependency is expressed via the meta-package, x-window-system. > > Yes. > > > therefore, whatever the dependencies that x-window-system lists > > must ALSO apply to all its REAL packages. > > No; otherwise we wouldn't need metapackages. > > > so, even if you "jump in", as i did, into installing only > > a limited subset of packages, there HAS to be some way of > > saying "this might not work". > > xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should > handle this correctly. apt-get did not. i use neither dselect nor aptitude, they are curses / GUI based and therefore confusing to me. > > you see, it's not that x-window-system-core depends on xserver-xfree86, > > xlibmesa3, xfonts-base, xfonts-100dpi, xfonts-75dpi, xfonts-scalable, > > xbase-clients and xutils. > > > > it's that xserver-xfree86 CANNOT WORK WITHOUT those packages installed. > > Nope - it can work without xlibmesa3, without any font packages, without > xbase-clients, and without xutils. Who says your fonts and running apps > have to be local? i understand this: i installed xfs, and xfstt, and xfont-100dpi, and xfont-this-and-that, and a whole load of other stuff that i forget now. in fact everything _but_ xfonts-base because it disappeared in the list of apt-cache search xfonts. > > if xserver-xfree86 does not work without x-window-system's group > > of packages having been installed, then this needs to be specified. > > Only thing, it does. ... how?? > > "you are about to install the following package however it is > > unlikely to work unless you install one of the following: > > x-window-system; y-window-system ..." do you wish to proceed > > yes or no. > > xserver-xfree86, as I said above, recommends that you install > xfonts-base, through its Recommends: xfonts-base relationship. then why did apt-get not advise me of that recommendation, note that it is not installed, and ask me if i wanted to add it to the list of packages to install? also, xfs i note does not have such a Recommends: xfonts-base. > > if you believe that xserver-xfree86 is _not_ dependent upon > > xfonts-base, then why is it possible to install xserver-xfree86 > > at all when neither the meta package x-window-system nor > > x-window-system-core nor the real package xfonts-base is > > not installed? > > Because you can still have a flawlessly working X system without it? > Hell, you could run KDE if you liked. ick! :) the following command doesn't even work if you don't have xfonts-base: XFree86 -configfile /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 the following command _also_ does not work if you do not have xfonts-base: xf86cfg yes i had installed xfs, and hand-edited the config file to include "unix/:7100". no this did not fix the problem. > > if x-window-system is a meta-package that installs > > xserver-xfree86, what is the equivalent package to > > x-window-system that gets xserver-mach32 installed, or > > xserver-svga installed? > > AFAIK, there is none for the XFree86 3.3.x servers; such is life. ah, well :) but you appreciate why i mention it? let's assume that an x-window-system-mach32 exists etc. which depends on xserver-X wher X is the same as x-window-system- surely this is painful, and because it is painful this issue has not been fixed? -- -- this message is private, confidential, and is intented for the specified recipients only. if you received in error, altered, deleted, modified, destroyed or interfered with the contents of this message, in whole or in part, please inform the sender (that's me), immediately. if you, the recipient, reply to this message, and do not then receive a response, please consider your reply to have been lost or deliberately destroyed: i *always* acknowledge personal email received. please therefore take appropriate action and use appropriate protocols to ensure effective communication. thank you. -- T
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
okay, how about this as a solution. the debconf / apt xserver configuration performs a detection that xfree86 has failed (runs it). then it checks the configuration and the fonts options and then asks, based on that information, "it has been noted that [you do not have xfonts-base installed], nor [do you have xfs installed]. your system is unlikely to work without access to fonts. what do you want to do? - add an extra line to your xf86config to use xfs on a remote server - install xfs or some local fonts later - install xfs locally, now - install xfonts-base and some other fonts, now. - sort things out yourself, later. " ? -- -- this message is private, confidential, and is intented for the specified recipients only. if you received in error, altered, deleted, modified, destroyed or interfered with the contents of this message, in whole or in part, please inform the sender (that's me), immediately. if you, the recipient, reply to this message, and do not then receive a response, please consider your reply to have been lost or deliberately destroyed: i *always* acknowledge personal email received. please therefore take appropriate action and use appropriate protocols to ensure effective communication. thank you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:06:17AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > okay, how about this as a solution. > > the debconf / apt xserver configuration performs a detection > that xfree86 has failed (runs it). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
geometry for ibook2
Hi X-Folks,
I've written an geometry file for the apple ibook2.
Included is the patch to the xkb directory of the actual
xlibs package in sid. I hope it will be useful to a bunch
of beginners. I'm not subscribed to the list, so If you
like to hear from me, cc to me.
Eric Böse-Wolf
diff -uNr xkb.orig/geometry/ibook2 xkb.new/geometry/ibook2
--- xkb.orig/geometry/ibook2 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ xkb.new/geometry/ibook2 2003-02-18 16:54:08.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,173 @@
+// $XFree86: xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/macintosh,v 1.1 1999/05/23 05:27:50 dawes Exp $
+default xkb_geometry "ibook2" {
+
+description= "ibook2";
+width= 277;
+height= 110;
+
+shape.cornerRadius= 1;
+shape "NORM" { { [ 18,18] }, { [2,1], [ 16,17] } };
+shape "ALPHA" { { [ 18,9] }, { [2,0.5], [ 16,8] } };
+shape "SPCL" { { [ 18.5,20] }, { [2,1], [ 17, 19] } };
+shape "META" { { [ 22,20] }, { [2,1], [ 21, 19] } };
+shape "BKSP" { { [ 29.2,18] }, { [2,1], [ 28,17] } };
+
+shape "TAB" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "BKSL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+
+shape "RTRN" { { [ 0,0], [19,0], [19,37], [4,37], [4,18], [0,18] },
+ { [ 1,0.5], [18,0.5], [18,36], [5,36], [5,17], [1,17] } };
+
+shape "CAPS" { { [ 32,18] }, { [2,1], [ 30,17] } };
+shape "LCTL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "LALT" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "LFSH" { { [ 23.6,18] }, { [2,1], [ 22,17] } };
+shape "RCTL" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "RALT" { { [ 28,18] }, { [2,1], [ 26,17] } };
+shape "RTSH" { { [ 43,18] }, { [2,1], [ 42,17] } };
+shape "SPCE" { { [92.8,20] }, { [2,1], [91.8,19] } };
+shape "KP0" { { [ 37,18] }, { [2,1], [ 35,17] } };
+shape "KPEN" { { [ 18,37] }, { [2,1], [ 16,36] } };
+
+shape "LEDS" { cornerRadius= 0, { [ 76 ,20 ] } };
+shape "LED" { cornerRadius= 0, { [ 5, 1 ] } };
+
+//solid "LedPanel" {
+// shape= "LEDS";
+// top= 52;
+// left= 375;
+//};
+
+//indicator.onColor= "green";
+//indicator.offColor= "green30";
+//indicator.top= 67;
+//indicator.shape= "LED";
+//indicator "NumLock" { left= 379; };
+// indicator "CapsLock"{ left= 404; };
+//indicator "ScrollLock" { left= 429; };
+text.top= 95;
+text.color= "black";
+text "FN" { left= 9; text="FN"; };
+// text "CapsLockLabel" { left= 403; text="Caps\nLock"; };
+// text "ScrollLockLabel" { left= 428; text="Scroll\nLock"; };
+
+section.left= 0;
+row.left= 1;
+key.shape= "NORM";
+key.gap= 0.7;
+
+section "Function" {
+ top= 2;
+ row {
+ top= 1;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 9.7, },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 10.4, },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ , "ALPHA" },
+{ shape= "ALPHA", gap= 11.9, }
+ };
+ };
+}; // End of "Function" section
+
+section "Alpha" {
+ top= 12;
+ row {
+ top= 1;
+ keys { , , , , ,
+ , , , , ,
+ , , , { , "BKSP" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 20;
+ keys { { , "TAB" }, , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , , , { , "RTRN" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 39;
+ keys { { , "CAPS" }, , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , ,
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 58;
+ keys { { , "LFSH" }, , , , ,
+ , , , , , ,
+ , { , "RTSH" }
+ };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 77;
+ keys { { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "SPCL" },
+ { , "META" },
+ { , "SPCE" },
+ { , "META" },
+ { , "SPCL" }
+ };
+ };
+}; // End of "Alpha" section
+
+section "Editing" {
+ top= 12;
+ left= 216.7;
+// row {
+// top= 1;
+// keys { , , };
+// };
+//row {
+// top= 20;
+// keys { , , };
+// };
+ row {
+ top= 77;
+ left= 19.65;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" } };
+ };
+ row {
+ top= 87;
+ keys { { , "ALPHA" },
+ { , "ALPHA" },
+ { , "ALPHA" } };
+ };
+}; // End of "Editing" section
+//
+//// Begin of "Keypad" section
+//section "Keypad" {
+// top= 91;
+// left= 375;
+// row {
+// top= 1;
+//keys { , , , };
+// };
+//row {
+// top= 20;
+// keys { , , , };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 39;
+// keys { , , , };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 58;
+// keys { , , , { , "KPEN" } };
+// };
+// row {
+// top= 77;
+// keys { { , "KP0" }, };
+// };
+//}; // End of "Keypad" section
+
+}; // End of "default" geometry
diff -uNr xkb.orig/geometry.dir xkb.ne
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 10:55:47AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:06:38PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > xserver-xfree86 Recommends: xfonts-base - dselect and aptitude should > > handle this correctly. > apt-get did not. No, apt-get is an expert's tool, it's not designed for use by the casual hacker. If you don't know what you're doing, you should stick with aptitude or dselect (preferably aptitude). Otherwise you're going to have this sort of problem over and over again. > i use neither dselect nor aptitude, they are curses / GUI based and > therefore confusing to me. No, both can be used from the command-line like apt-get. The curses-based interface is purely optional. In fact, aptitude can be used as an exact replacement for apt-get. It has all the same commands, plus a few new (and useful) ones. The main difference is that aptitude is smarter, and installs recommended and suggested packages (at least by default -- I configured my copy to ignore suggestions). Also aptitude can remember which packages have been installed as dependencies, so you can say "aptitude install kde", and it will install all 400 KDE-related packages, and if you decide you don't like kde, you can say "aptitude remove kde" and all 400 packages will go away. That feature alone (which dselect does not have) makes aptitude worth the price of admission to me. > surely this is painful, and because it is painful > this issue has not been fixed? It's only painful for those who refuse to use the tools that make it easy. If you insist on using apt-get, when you obviously *don't* know enough to use it properly, expect no sympathy from anyone. Apt-get requires that you check for recommendations manually. If you're not willing to do that, don't use apt-get. It's just that simple. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra-osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico-to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 06:16:24AM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: chris, thanks for responding. i acknowledge and understand what you are saying about aptitude. if i had known that it existed, and had a command-line-only interface, i would have investigated and possibly even used it well before now. i have been using debian for a number of years, now, and i am puzzled that i have not come across aptitude before now. (perhaps this is because i have been using debian before aptitude existed? the man page is dated 9/8/00...?) i _did_ know of dselect and don't like it, it is _way_ too confusing and terse: keystrokes are invisible and it is impossible to find out what they are. pine at least has at the bottom of its display two lines of context-sensitive options that allow you to see at a glance what keys do what (ah ha! i note that aptitude does! great!) i always worry about pressing the wrong keys with dselect, and have long since stopped using it. i have now installed aptitude and will investigate it. [hey it looks interesting, esp. the "Tasks" which has a description portion at the bottom of the screen. it still looks a little terse and presents a frightening large list of packages at you. is there a search option like apt-cache search? ] > > surely this is painful, and because it is painful > > this issue has not been fixed? > > It's only painful for those who refuse to use the tools that make it > easy. If you insist on using apt-get, when you obviously *don't* know > enough to use it properly, expect no sympathy from anyone. Apt-get > requires that you check for recommendations manually. If you're not > willing to do that, don't use apt-get. It's just that simple. chris, i have to say this: this is amazing. literally EVERY developer who has responded on this and the other bug i raised last week has said something along the lines of: "you seem to have problem A. several people including yourself have encountered problem A before, and it is becoming boring and monotonous to hear yet another report about people fixing A by trying Y. you do not know what you are doing if you have tried Y. if you knew what you were doing, you would do it like X." where there is a complete lack of comprehension and appreciation for the simple fact that it is NOT POSSIBLE to obtain ANY hints as to the relationship between A and X by trying to do Y, and Y failing to resolve A. almost EVERY response i have received so far on bugs reported fits into this template. in your paragraph above as an example, i DID NOT KNOW that apt-get falls into category Y because i have been using it ever since i started using debian, three maybe four years ago and i DID NOT KNOW that aptitude even existed and falls into category X to solve A. my question to all of you, the knowledgeable and experienced debian developers, is: can you appreciate that there must be something wrong, here, if someone who has been using debian for years gets into difficulties due to lack of information? imagine then how difficult it must be for someone who is new to debian, like my brother dan, to recover from quite simple mistakes. (dan asked dselect to use gnome, then removed gnome, and then needed to upgrade an independent package: for _some_ as yet unidentified reason the error about dselect wanting to use gnome caused dselect, and apt, to not be able to proceed on the other removes-and-installs). l. p.s. i do hope that something positive comes out of all these messages. if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other people like my brother and my friends to be able to use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped it _several_ emails ago. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#181724: Acknowledgement (xserver-xfree86)
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 181724 xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor >tolerances Bug#181724: xserver-xfree86 Changed Bug title. > tag 181724 + moreinfo Bug#181724: xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor tolerances There were no tags set. Tags added: moreinfo > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#181724: Acknowledgement (xserver-xfree86)
retitle 181724 xserver-xfree86: [s3virge] driver got more strict with monitor tolerances tag 181724 + moreinfo thanks On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:33:30PM -0800, Rob Bos wrote: > Addendum to report: It turns out that my Horiz/Vert timings were off. > I consulted my monitor's manual (blew the dust off it, in fact) and > noted that the settings that dpkg-reconfigure chose for it were > incorrect. They've been incorrect for about a year, but something in > the most recent release ran into that bug. Can you please supply this bug with the information requested in the XF86Config(7) manual page? Also, I'm not sure what the problem could be, given that there were no changes to the s3virge driver between 4.2.1-4 and -5. Perhaps the new GCC 3.2 toolchain impacted floating point math somehow; I'm really not sure. -- G. Branden Robinson| A fundamentalist is someone who Debian GNU/Linux | hates sin more than he loves [EMAIL PROTECTED] | virtue. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- John H. Schaar msg05893/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:42:08AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > ... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because > it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install > "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? Debconf scripts do not have a good way of knowing what is or is not going to be installed in the future. They can only check to see what is installed on the filesystem when they run, which might not have very much to do with what is installed a few minutes later. Note that debconf "preconfiguration" means this is the case quite frequently; all debconf questions are asked *before* packages are installed to the filesystem. -- G. Branden Robinson| One man's "magic" is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | engineering. "Supernatural" is a [EMAIL PROTECTED] | null word. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Robert Heinlein msg05894/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other > people like my brother and my friends to be able to > use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), > i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped > it _several_ emails ago. It appears to me that, among other things, you did not read the woody Release Notes, which do in fact discuss xfonts-base. -- G. Branden Robinson| That's the saving grace of humor: Debian GNU/Linux | if you fail, no one is laughing at [EMAIL PROTECTED] | you. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- A. Whitney Brown msg05895/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:08:36AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > if i didn't care about debian, and didn't want other > > people like my brother and my friends to be able to > > use it (instead of bloody suse and stupid redhat), > > i wouldn't press this issue, i would have dropped > > it _several_ emails ago. > > It appears to me that, among other things, you did not read the woody > Release Notes, which do in fact discuss xfonts-base. no! didn't know _those_ existed either *grin*. this is all about communication. of all the advice i have received, which i _really_ really appreciate, not one single bit of it could i have found without all your (collective) help. basically, the debian project is seriously lacking a glossary, index and reference knowledge base. even if such things do already exist, they exist in places that require knowledge in order to find _out_ that they exist. and most of that knowledge is in people's heads: if you're not hooked into the mailing lists, mindset and culture, it's almost impossible to fix problems on your own. most ordinary users can deal with less dimensions and have a lot less technically-aware creativity to spare than developers do... l. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:04:25AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:42:08AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > ... or is this the sort of thing that cannot be noted because > > it's pre-install and the debconf system cannot do pre-install > > "questions" like it can do pre-configure "questions"? > > Debconf scripts do not have a good way of knowing what is or is not > going to be installed in the future. They can only check to see what is > installed on the filesystem when they run, which might not have very > much to do with what is installed a few minutes later. (can the list of packages presently requested to be installed be easily made available to the debconf scripts, such that the packages both before and after batch installation may be compared?) > Note that > debconf "preconfiguration" means this is the case quite frequently; all > debconf questions are asked *before* packages are installed to the > filesystem. ah. okay. well it was worth a shot! so the only viable option left is as part of a post-install analysis, to put up a warning saying "error, you have a package installed that is unlikely to work! install one of the "recommended" packages to make this package useable". a bit like the advice from potato 2.2 from dselect which said "pick a front-end; you can easily change the dselect front-end at a later date" ... but in a similar fashion to this problem, that advice didn't say _how_ you should "easily change the dselect front-end in future" :) l. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#178242: not an issue
On Don, 2003-02-20 at 04:02, Ari Pollak wrote: > You should have the latest versions of the DRM kernel modules, but you > especially need the xlibmesa4-dri package, or else you'll get weird > problems like XFree86.0.log saying Direct rendering is enabled, but > glxinfo saying direct rendering is disabled. Is it really weird that direct rendering doesn't work when the 3D driver is missing? :) -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#181815: xlibs: Problem with XRenderCompositeText16 in Render extension
Package: xlibs
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: important
Tags: patch upstream sid
Hello Branden,
Mozilla Xft users (including myself) have been experiencing strange
disappearing text problem, as explained in Mozilla Bugzilla "Bug
#187377: Characters disappear with xft if fallback triggered twice on
the same line" and related bug reports. See:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=187377
Most bug reporters use Debian or FreeBSD. This problem does not happen
on Red Hat 8.0. I guess not many people know the fix yet.
The details of this bug came up on the XFree86 fonts mailing list just
two days ago:
ITO Tsuyoshi says:
While performing some test about Mozilla Bugzilla Bug #187377 [1], I
found that XRenderCompositeText16 function in Render extension does
not draw text as intended when multiple glyphsets are involved in one
call.
According to the code of the Render extension on X server side,
XRenderCompositeText16 should send a "glyphset-switch sign" (a glyph
element with len = 0xff) to the X server when it encounters a glyph
element whose glyphset is different from the one of the previous glyph
element. However, it actually sends the glyphset-switch sign when it
encounters a glyph element whose glyphset is different from the one of
the _first_ glyph element. XRenderCompositeText{8,32} probably have
the same problem.
and provided a patch. Keith Packard replied:
Your analysis is quite correct. A fix solving this issue was placed in
XFree86 CVS on 2002-8-31.
That patch was also included in Red Hat 8.0, probably days before it
was final:
* Sun Sep 01 2002 Mike A. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 4.2.0-70
...
- Added XFree86-4.2.0-libXrender-bugfix.patch to fix showstopper (#73243)
That patch (still identical to the one in current XFree86-4.3 CVS) is
attached. Please include this in your next upload. (Feel free to change
the "094_" number. :-)
Thanks!
Anthony
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux anthony 2.4.21-pre4-ac1 #1 Mon Feb 3 03:11:48 HKT 2003 i686
Versions of packages xlibs depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.1-12 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libfreetype6 2.1.3-10 FreeType 2 font engine, shared lib
ii xfree86-common4.2.1-5X Window System (XFree86) infrastr
-- no debconf information
Index: lib/Xrender/Glyph.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -p -r1.7 -r1.10
--- xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c 2001/12/27 01:16:00 1.7
+++ xc/lib/Xrender/Glyph.c 2002/08/31 18:15:45 1.10
@@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ XRenderFreeGlyphs (Display *dpy,
GetReq(RenderFreeGlyphs, req);
req->reqType = info->codes->major_opcode;
req->renderReqType = X_RenderFreeGlyphs;
+req->glyphset = glyphset;
len = nglyphs;
SetReqLen(req, len, len);
len <<= 2;
@@ -390,6 +391,7 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
{
XExtDisplayInfo *info = XRenderFindDisplay (dpy);
xRenderCompositeGlyphs8Req *req;
+GlyphSet glyphset;
long len;
long elen;
xGlyphElt *elt;
@@ -419,10 +421,17 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
*/
len = 0;
+glyphset = elts[0].glyphset;
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
{
- if (elts[i].glyphset != req->glyphset)
+ /*
+ * Check for glyphset change
+ */
+ if (elts[i].glyphset != glyphset)
+ {
+ glyphset = elts[i].glyphset;
len += (SIZEOF (xGlyphElt) + 4) >> 2;
+ }
nchars = elts[i].nchars;
/*
* xGlyphElt must be aligned on a 32-bit boundary; this is
@@ -434,26 +443,24 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
}
req->length += len;
-/*
- * If the entire request does not fit into the remaining space in the
- * buffer, flush the buffer first.
- */
-if (dpy->bufptr + (len << 2) > dpy->bufmax)
- _XFlush (dpy);
-
+/*
+ * Send the glyphs
+ */
+glyphset = elts[0].glyphset;
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
{
/*
* Switch glyphsets
*/
- if (elts[i].glyphset != req->glyphset)
+ if (elts[i].glyphset != glyphset)
{
+ glyphset = elts[i].glyphset;
BufAlloc (xGlyphElt *, elt, SIZEOF (xGlyphElt));
elt->len = 0xff;
elt->deltax = 0;
elt->deltay = 0;
- Data32(dpy, &elts[i].glyphset, 4);
+ Data32(dpy, &glyphset, 4);
}
nchars = elts[i].nchars;
xDst = elts[i].xOff;
@@ -461,15 +468,17 @@ XRenderCompositeText8 (Display *dp
chars = elts[i].chars;
while (nchars)
{
+ int this_chars = nchars > MAX_8 ? MAX_8 : nchars;
+
BufAlloc (xGlyphElt *, elt, SIZEOF(xGlyphElt))
- elt->len = nchars > MAX_8 ? MAX_8 : nchars;
+ elt->len = this_chars;
elt->deltax = xDst;
elt->deltay = yDst;
xDst = 0;
yDst = 0;
- Data (dpy, chars, elt->len);
- nchars -= elt->len;
-
Re: Bug#181632: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#181632: xserver-xfree86: could not open default font 'fixed')
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:18:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton scrawled: > i _did_ know of dselect and don't like it, it is _way_ too > confusing and terse: keystrokes are invisible and it is > impossible to find out what they are. Every time you start dselect and go to the select packages section, it tells you this. Every time. > is there a search option like apt-cache search? Use the '/' key. > "you seem to have problem A. > > several people including yourself have encountered problem A > before, and it is becoming boring and monotonous to hear > yet another report about people fixing A by trying Y. > > you do not know what you are doing if you have tried Y. > > if you knew what you were doing, you would do it like X." > > where there is a complete lack of comprehension and appreciation > for the simple fact that it is NOT POSSIBLE to obtain ANY > hints as to the relationship between A and X by trying to > do Y, and Y failing to resolve A. apt-cache show xserver-xfree86 | egrep ^Recommends: > in your paragraph above as an example, i DID NOT KNOW that > apt-get falls into category Y because i have been using it > ever since i started using debian, three maybe four years ago > and i DID NOT KNOW that aptitude even existed and falls into > category X to solve A. Well, apt-get isn't designed to be used by end-users, really. That's why dselect, aptitude, and the now-tanked deity exist(ed). These provide a nice, consistent interface, with proper handling of Recommends, et al. > my question to all of you, the knowledgeable and experienced > debian developers, is: > >can you appreciate that there must be something wrong, >here, if someone who has been using debian for years >gets into difficulties due to lack of information? As I'm not a Developer per se, I'll claim the 5th on this one. ;) > imagine then how difficult it must be for someone who is > new to debian, like my brother dan, to recover from quite > simple mistakes. He'd probably be using dselect, or aptitude. > (dan asked dselect to use gnome, then removed gnome, and > then needed to upgrade an independent package: for _some_ > as yet unidentified reason the error about dselect wanting > to use gnome caused dselect, and apt, to not be able to > proceed on the other removes-and-installs). You probably should be consistent with the tools you use to manage your packages. :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne msg05900/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
