Bug#253660: X crashes when attempting to start Neverball
Hi Branden, Thanks for the detailed instructions. I'll try to get at this today at lunch time. In the meantime, I thought it might also be worthwhile to mention that I have another PC here, with a Chips 6, on which Neverball does NOT crash X. (It's amazingly slow, but that's to be expected on a Pentium MMX with no hardware 3D...) -- graham
Bug#257142: xutils: makedepend looks for stddef.h, stdarg.h (and others) in wrong directories
Package: xutils Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 Severity: important -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.4.25-1-386 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US Versions of packages xutils depends on: ii cpp 4:3.3.4-1 The GNU C preprocessor (cpp) ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-13 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libncurses5 5.4-4 Shared libraries for terminal hand ii xfree86-common4.3.0.dfsg.1-4 X Window System (XFree86) infrastr ii zlib1g1:1.2.1.1-3compression library - runtime -- no debconf information As an example, here is the type of warnings I received : makedepend: warning: w_idt.c (reading /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xlib.h, line 72): cannot find include file "stddef.h" not in ../../../.././include/stddef.h not in /usr/X11R6/include/stddef.h not in /usr/local/lib/gcc-include/stddef.h not in /usr/include/stddef.h not in /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/3.3.3/include/stddef.h And here is the result of 'locate stddef.h' : - /usr/include/linux/stddef.h /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/3.3.4/include/stddef.h
Processed: reassign
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 229426 xlibs-data Bug#229426: Windows key buggy Bug reassigned from package `icewm' to `xlibs-data'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 01:26:59PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Jonas Meurer wrote: > > maybe most recent suggestions about the future of X in debian should > > involve a discussion about the policy for X maintaince. > > Apparently we did not send enough signals about this subject: > > "Everybody is part of the XSF" > > starting from our users to Branden and me as last. > > What is not clear about this concept? So call the group of people who can upload X something else. The XSF to me is meaningless as a concept - the BTS is world-write[0], and the really important X group are the gatekeepers to Debian - being yourself, Branden, and possibly Ishikawa. Let's call this group the DUX - Debian X Uploaders. If you think what I'm saying is stupid, then you're a master hacker on KDE, the Linux kernel, FreeBSD, Gentoo ... > > as a consequence, current 'x strike force' should undergo a radical > > change, to disponse of any hierachy in this developing group. > > Probably if you did not notice yet, the users are on top of everything. > They decide, some of them contributes directly, Branden and I prioritize > the work, review, test and commit. Upload as last. > > Can you spot please what is wrong with it? If I decide and propose something, will you upload it tomorrow? The reality is that you guys make decisions -- good or bad -- and have the final say on what hits Debian, as it stands. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's far away from the Utopia you paint where everyone can do everything. > Remember that until now neither Branden or me have made any suggestion of > where Debian should go. We are only listening and talking with people. > How can you perceive this as a need to revert how things are working? I was going to say because it didn't include me, but then I realised that I wouldn't want to go to any club that would take me as a member, or whatever the Spike Milligan quote is. ;) > > all this assuming that it is required to be member for uploading parts > > of X, regardless what upstrem tree. but if policy is that way, maybe > > this question also needs to be discussed a second time. > > Having only five or six people with SVN commit access does not mean that > others cannot contribute. If you feel that this is wrong, please explain > us why. I cannot contribute effectively, and I also feel that I cannot work within the XSF, while the SABDFL continues to feel he cannot work with me, and very rarely communicates with me. I have been actively removed from the DUX, and thus from X maintainence. That's why I can't contribute. [0]: Well, @gFH excluded. It's world-write in the same way debian-x is. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian: the universal operating system http://www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#253660: Test results
If you're interested in knowing what hardware I'm playing with, it's right here... http://www.kontron.com/products/pdproductdetail.cfm?keyProduct=31518 You could ask why I'm trying to run neverball on this, knowing that the performance is likely to be so poor as to make it unplayable... and I'd answer "I agree, but X shouldn't crash". Okay, I got the debug X server installed and activated, then logged in on console 1 as root, and: # /etc/init.d/kdm stop # ulimit -c unlimited # startx $(which x-terminal-emulator) I now have a lone, bare Konsole... # /usr/games/neverball X promptly crashes with signal 11. I'm back at tty1 but now I have a problem: the machine seems to be locked up. It isn't responding to keypresses and I can't seem to ssh in. The last line I see is: Please report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Normally I see a shell prompt immediately after this. I've tried turning off swap, reducing the number of kernel modules I load on boot to an absolute minimum, making sure I have way more free disk space than my total RAM size, and even bypassing the Konsole and loading Neverball directly, ie.: # startx /usr/games/neverball and X still crashes, and my machine still locks up solid when X exits. After rebooting, there's no core dump file on the disk. If I skip the "ulimit" step, I don't get a lockup when X crashes, but obviously I don't get a core file either. Any ideas? -- graham
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On 01/07/2004 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > is it required to be 'x strike force' member for uploading xlibs? > > No but it is a good idea to: > > a) coordinate > b) work together > c) read below sure. > Probably if you did not notice yet, the users are on top of everything. > They decide, some of them contributes directly, Branden and I prioritize > the work, review, test and commit. Upload as last. > > Can you spot please what is wrong with it? sorry, nothing is wrong with that. i just dared to comment on something i've no glue about. it was no more than my subjective point of view. > How can you perceive this as a need to revert how things are working? i refered to daniel stones posting branden quoted. as i already mentioned - the thoughts where subjective - > Having only five or six people with SVN commit access does not mean that > others cannot contribute. If you feel that this is wrong, please explain > us why. there's no problem with that. what doesn't mean that some day a problem occures. bye jonas
Bug#257187: pkgconfig is out of sync with actual package
Package: xrender
Severity: important
Hi,
xrender currently abuses pkgconfig; by installing its includes to
/usr/X11R6, but telling configure they're in /usr, xrender.pc will
contain an includedir of /usr/include, and according CFLAGS[0]. This is
wrong, as /usr/X11R6/include is actually needed, instead of /usr.
Please either move the headers back to /usr (why were they in /usr/X11R6
in the first place?), or at least put --includedir=/usr/X11R6/include.
:) d
[0]: There will be no CFLAGS, as pkgconfig strips out CFLAGS involving
/usr/{lib,include}, but anyway.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.24-xfs
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Bug#257188: Cannot startx because no usable configuration for SiS card
Package: XFree86 Version: 4.1.0.1 I cannot 'startx', which fails with a 'no screens found' error. I ran 'X -configure', but I am getting an 'appropriate data has not been added to xf86PciInfo.h' error. I have included the 'startx', 'X -configure' and 'scanpci -v' output. What do I need to do to be able to startx? Regards, Daniel Startx output: This is a pre-release version of XFree86, and is not supported in any way. Bugs may be reported to XFree86@XFree86.Org and patches submitted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Before reporting bugs in pre-release versions, please check the latest version in the XFree86 CVS repository (http://www.XFree86.Org/cvs) XFree86 Version 4.1.0.1 / X Window System (protocol Version 11, revision 0, vendor release 6510) Release Date: 21 December 2001 If the server is older than 6-12 months, or if your card is newer than the above date, look for a newer version before reporting problems. (See http://www.XFree86.Org/FAQ) Build Operating System: Linux 2.6.3-bk2 i686 [ELF] Module Loader present (==) Log file: "/var/log/XFree86.0.log", Time: Wed Jun 30 18:54:17 2004 (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/XF86Config-4" Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) ServerLayout "Default Layout" (**) |-->Screen "Default Screen" (0) (**) | |-->Monitor "Generic Monitor" (**) | |-->Device "Generic Video Card" (**) |-->Input Device "Generic Keyboard" (**) Option "XkbRules" "xfree86" (**) XKB: rules: "xfree86" (**) Option "XkbModel" "pc104" (**) XKB: model: "pc104" (**) Option "XkbLayout" "us" (**) XKB: layout: "us" (==) Keyboard: CustomKeycode disabled (**) |-->Input Device "Configured Mouse" (**) |-->Input Device "Generic Mouse" (WW) The directory "/usr/lib/X11/fonts/cyrillic" does not exist. Entry deleted from font path. (**) FontPath set to "unix/:7100,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/misc,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled,/usr /lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/Type1,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/S peedo,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi,/usr/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi" (==) RgbPath set to "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb" (==) ModulePath set to "/usr/X11R6/lib/modules" (--) using VT number 7 (WW) Cannot open APM (II) Module ABI versions: XFree86 ANSI C Emulation: 0.1 XFree86 Video Driver: 0.4 XFree86 XInput driver : 0.2 XFree86 Server Extension : 0.1 XFree86 Font Renderer : 0.2 (II) Loader running on linux (II) LoadModule: "bitmap" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a (II) Module bitmap: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.1.0.1, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: XFree86 Font Renderer ABI class: XFree86 Font Renderer, version 0.2 (II) Loading font Bitmap (II) LoadModule: "pcidata" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libpcidata.a (II) Module pcidata: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.1.0.1, module version = 0.1.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.4 (II) PCI: Probing config type using method 1 (II) PCI: Config type is 1 (II) PCI: stages = 0x03, oldVal1 = 0x80001044, mode1Res1 = 0x8000 (II) PCI: PCI scan (all values are in hex) (II) PCI: 00:00:0: chip 1039,0741 card 1849,0741 rev 03 class 06,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:01:0: chip 1039,0003 card , rev 00 class 06,04,00 hdr 01 (II) PCI: 00:02:0: chip 1039,0008 card , rev 25 class 06,01,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:02:5: chip 1039,5513 card 1849,5513 rev 00 class 01,01,80 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:02:7: chip 1039,7012 card 1849,7012 rev a0 class 04,01,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:03:0: chip 1039,7001 card 1849,7001 rev 0f class 0c,03,10 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:03:1: chip 1039,7001 card 1849,7001 rev 0f class 0c,03,10 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:03:2: chip 1039,7002 card 1849,7002 rev 00 class 0c,03,20 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:04:0: chip 1039,0900 card 1849,0900 rev 90 class 02,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 01:00:0: chip 1039,6330 card 1849,6331 rev 00 class 03,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: End of PCI scan (II) LoadModule: "scanpci" (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libscanpci.a (II) Module scanpci: vendor="The XFree86 Project" compiled for 4.1.0.1, module version = 0.1.0 ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.4 (II) UnloadModule: "scanpci" (II) Unloading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libscanpci.a (II) Host-to-PCI bridge: (II) PCI-to-ISA bridge: (II) PCI-to-PCI bridge: (II) Bus 0: bridge is at (0:0:0), (-1,0,0), BCTRL: 0x08 (VGA_EN is set) (II) Bus 0 I/O range: [0] -1 00x - 0x (0x1) IX[B] (II) Bus 0 non-prefetchable memory range: [0] -1 00x - 0x (0x0) MX[B] (II) Bus 0 prefetchable memory range: [0] -1 00x - 0x (0x0) MX[B] (II) Bus 1: bridge is at (0:1:0), (0,1,2), BCTRL: 0x0a (VGA_EN is set) (II) Bus 1 I/O range: [0] -1 00xb000 - 0xbfff (0x1000) IX[B] (
Bug#254923: xserver-xfree86: [keyboard] alt key not working
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 06:35:24PM -0500, I wrote: > The alt_tab_fix.diff did clear up the problem I was having in that > each initial use of a modifier key was ignored. So Windows-L, which I > have mapped in wmaker to open a local xterm, would be seen as an > ordinary L the first time I tried it. The second time an thereafter > it would open a new xterm as expected. The same thing for control and > other modifier keys. This problem went away after applying > alt_tab_fix.diff. I spoke too soon; that patch didn't make that problem go away. The first use of Alt, Control, etc. per xdm login session is still ignored. --Pete
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 01:26:59PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Jonas Meurer wrote: > > > maybe most recent suggestions about the future of X in debian should > > > involve a discussion about the policy for X maintaince. > > > > Apparently we did not send enough signals about this subject: > > > > "Everybody is part of the XSF" > > > > starting from our users to Branden and me as last. > > > > What is not clear about this concept? > > So call the group of people who can upload X something else. > > The XSF to me is meaningless as a concept If it is meaningless to you, it does not mean it is meaningless to the entire community. > - the BTS is world-write[0], > and the really important X group are the gatekeepers to Debian - being > yourself, Branden, and possibly Ishikawa. Let's call this group the DUX > - Debian X Uploaders. DUX is not appropriate either for other political reasons that would scare italian people away from here. > > If you think what I'm saying is stupid, then you're a master hacker on > KDE, the Linux kernel, FreeBSD, Gentoo ... now.. try to think i am and you don't know because i want to play stupid :P > > > as a consequence, current 'x strike force' should undergo a radical > > > change, to disponse of any hierachy in this developing group. > > > > Probably if you did not notice yet, the users are on top of everything. > > They decide, some of them contributes directly, Branden and I prioritize > > the work, review, test and commit. Upload as last. > > > > Can you spot please what is wrong with it? > > If I decide and propose something, will you upload it tomorrow? No, and you know that. it would still go trough the priority list, commit, review and test. And you know as much as we do how much time it takes that process. If you want to question the time we take to include things that's a separate argument. If you want to question that we do not accept anything than sorry but you know that is not true. > The reality is that you guys make decisions -- good or bad -- and have > the final say on what hits Debian, as it stands. This is not necessarily > a bad thing, but it's far away from the Utopia you paint where everyone > can do everything. Clearly there is some minimal filtering. We are not patch-o-matic robots. And we take responsabilities for the changes we introduce. Personally if i don't feel to comfortable in applying a patch, i rather prefer to check it twice before inclusion. Specially because we will have to maintain it during the time. > > > all this assuming that it is required to be member for uploading parts > > > of X, regardless what upstrem tree. but if policy is that way, maybe > > > this question also needs to be discussed a second time. > > > > Having only five or six people with SVN commit access does not mean that > > others cannot contribute. If you feel that this is wrong, please explain > > us why. > > I cannot contribute effectively, and I also feel that I cannot work > within the XSF, while the SABDFL continues to feel he cannot work with > me, and very rarely communicates with me. I have been actively removed > from the DUX, and thus from X maintainence. That's why I can't > contribute. And you are so wrong here. I am almost tired to repeat to you the same thing over and over.. in irc and now on the mailing list. You can contribute with: a) patches for bugs (you are part of upstream, aren't you? you are DD and Debian user, aren't you?) b) commenting on threads like you did on this one in a really nice and detailed way c) testing fixes and pre-releases d) stop repeating to me the same thing because i am sick and tired to repeat the same answer ;) e) all of the above. If you don't feel comfortable to work within the XSF, noone will force you to do so, but please stop finding excuses that you can contribute only with SVN access. You are doing an incredible amount of job upstream, do you realize that sooner or later it will flow back here? You are doing it for even a larger userbase than Debian. so what? you still think you are not contributing? Fabio -- fajita: step one Whatever the problem, step one is always to look in the error log. fajita: step two When in danger or in doubt, step two is to scream and shout.
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:22:42PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Daniel Stone wrote: > > So call the group of people who can upload X something else. > > > > The XSF to me is meaningless as a concept > > If it is meaningless to you, it does not mean it is meaningless to the > entire community. It doesn't necessarily mean it isn't, either. I like to think I have a little bit of experience in XSF matters. > > - the BTS is world-write[0], > > and the really important X group are the gatekeepers to Debian - being > > yourself, Branden, and possibly Ishikawa. Let's call this group the DUX > > - Debian X Uploaders. > > DUX is not appropriate either for other political reasons that > would scare italian people away from here. Sorry, I didn't know. > > If I decide and propose something, will you upload it tomorrow? > > No, and you know that. it would still go trough the priority list, commit, > review and test. And you know as much as we do how much time it takes that > process. If you want to question the time we take to include things that's > a separate argument. If you want to question that we do not accept > anything than sorry but you know that is not true. The point I was making was that there is a group with significantly more power than everyone else, and the ultimate gatekeepers of Debian in X. If this is not true, and I'm part of the XSF, can I start uploading again? > > The reality is that you guys make decisions -- good or bad -- and have > > the final say on what hits Debian, as it stands. This is not necessarily > > a bad thing, but it's far away from the Utopia you paint where everyone > > can do everything. > > Clearly there is some minimal filtering. We are not patch-o-matic robots. > And we take responsabilities for the changes we introduce. Personally if i > don't feel to comfortable in applying a patch, i rather prefer to check it > twice before inclusion. Specially because we will have to maintain it > during the time. Right, so you're saying you're part of a class of people who have powers and responsibilities in regard to Debian's X packages above and beyond the normal users? > > I cannot contribute effectively, and I also feel that I cannot work > > within the XSF, while the SABDFL continues to feel he cannot work with > > me, and very rarely communicates with me. I have been actively removed > > from the DUX, and thus from X maintainence. That's why I can't > > contribute. > > And you are so wrong here. I am almost tired to repeat to you the same > thing over and over.. in irc and now on the mailing list. I don't feel I can work with the XSF as it stands. I worry that anything I contribute might end up being for nothing; far higher than normal. Thus, I don't contribute. > You can contribute with: > > a) patches for bugs (you are part of upstream, aren't you? you are DD and > Debian user, aren't you?) Yes. > b) commenting on threads like you did on this one in a really nice and > detailed way Yes. > c) testing fixes and pre-releases Yes. > d) stop repeating to me the same thing because i am sick and tired to > repeat the same answer ;) No. :P > e) all of the above. Yes. Now, take a deep breath, and imagine that you're not talking to Daniel Stone, but to someone who you've just pulled up in an internet cafe. What are their answers to all of the above? My point is that the XSF is not the important club to be in; that club is the group of yourself, Branden, and Ishikawa, who (whether you like it or not) are the ultimate arbiters of what goes into X, and what doesn't. I invite you to rescind your Debian account and still claim you're a DD because sponsorship works. :P > If you don't feel comfortable to work within the XSF, noone will force you > to do so, but please stop finding excuses that you can contribute only > with SVN access. I didn't say that. What I've said is that I don't feel at all comfortable with the XSF as it stands (especially with a leader who frequently point-blank refuses to speak to me, usually about matters regarding the XSF, usually important, and, as he tells the world not-infrequently, has me on /ignore on IRC), and that the XSF is a fiction of sorts. I think we need a name for xfree86's Uploaders. We'll call this mythical cabal that, and we can agree that that's a closed group that I'm not in, and that they are the arbiters of what goes into Debian's X. If the latter is not true, feel free to throw me in Uploaders, next upload. > You are doing an incredible amount of job upstream, do you realize that > sooner or later it will flow back here? You are doing it for even a larger > userbase than Debian. so what? you still think you are not contributing? I know it will flow back here. But I'm not contributing in a *direct* way to the XSF, as it stands. :) d -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian: the universal operating system http://www.d
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Fri, 2004-07-02 at 06:37 +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:22:42PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto > wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > > > If I decide and propose something, will you upload it tomorrow? > > > > No, and you know that. it would still go trough the priority list, commit, > > review and test. And you know as much as we do how much time it takes that > > process. If you want to question the time we take to include things that's > > a separate argument. If you want to question that we do not accept > > anything than sorry but you know that is not true. > > The point I was making was that there is a group with significantly more > power than everyone else, and the ultimate gatekeepers of Debian in X. > If this is not true, and I'm part of the XSF, can I start uploading > again? What's that fixation of yours about uploading? I like to consider myself part of the XSF (although ATM I can only contribute very little due to my diploma thesis unfortunately), but I've never felt even the slightest urge to do an upload. If you aren't happy with the job Fabio does as release manager, I suggest you just express your opinion about that. > > Clearly there is some minimal filtering. We are not patch-o-matic robots. > > And we take responsabilities for the changes we introduce. Personally if i > > don't feel to comfortable in applying a patch, i rather prefer to check it > > twice before inclusion. Specially because we will have to maintain it > > during the time. Sounds good, but as a matter of fact, the last couple of uploads all contained more or less brown paper bag bugs. It would be nice if those could be dealt with even more promptly, or even better prevented from happening in the first place. :) -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Libre software enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 11:54:36PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: > On Fri, 2004-07-02 at 06:37 +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:22:42PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto > > wrote: > > > On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > If I decide and propose something, will you upload it tomorrow? > > > > > > No, and you know that. it would still go trough the priority list, commit, > > > review and test. And you know as much as we do how much time it takes that > > > process. If you want to question the time we take to include things that's > > > a separate argument. If you want to question that we do not accept > > > anything than sorry but you know that is not true. > > > > The point I was making was that there is a group with significantly more > > power than everyone else, and the ultimate gatekeepers of Debian in X. > > If this is not true, and I'm part of the XSF, can I start uploading > > again? > > What's that fixation of yours about uploading? I like to consider myself > part of the XSF (although ATM I can only contribute very little due to > my diploma thesis unfortunately), but I've never felt even the slightest > urge to do an upload. If you aren't happy with the job Fabio does as > release manager, I suggest you just express your opinion about that. I'm more than happy with the job Fabio does as RM - I have absolutely no issue here. My issue is with the fact he refuses to acknowledge that some people have a little more privilege than others in Debian X maintainership. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian: the universal operating system http://www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: reassign 257190 to xlibmesa3
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 257190 xlibmesa3 Bug#257190: kicker: Kicker hangs up after zooming OpenGL program, other programs run perfectly? Warning: Unknown package 'xlibmesa' Bug reassigned from package `xlibmesa' to `xlibmesa3'. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm more than happy with the job Fabio does as RM - I have absolutely no > issue here. My issue is with the fact he refuses to acknowledge that > some people have a little more privilege than others in Debian X > maintainership. Why does it matter if he acknowledges it or not? -Miles -- `Suppose Korea goes to the World Cup final against Japan and wins,' Moon said. `All the past could be forgiven.' [NYT]
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 12:46:44PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'm more than happy with the job Fabio does as RM - I have absolutely no > > issue here. My issue is with the fact he refuses to acknowledge that > > some people have a little more privilege than others in Debian X > > maintainership. > > Why does it matter if he acknowledges it or not? Because I'm bloody-minded? ;) -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian: the universal operating system http://www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Future of X packages in Debian
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Jonas Meurer wrote: > is it required to be 'x strike force' member for uploading xlibs? > No but it is a good idea to: a) coordinate b) work together c) read below > > maybe most recent suggestions about the future of X in debian should > involve a discussion about the policy for X maintaince. Apparently we did not send enough signals about this subject: "Everybody is part of the XSF" starting from our users to Branden and me as last. What is not clear about this concept? > as a consequence, current 'x strike force' should undergo a radical > change, to disponse of any hierachy in this developing group. Probably if you did not notice yet, the users are on top of everything. They decide, some of them contributes directly, Branden and I prioritize the work, review, test and commit. Upload as last. Can you spot please what is wrong with it? Remember that until now neither Branden or me have made any suggestion of where Debian should go. We are only listening and talking with people. How can you perceive this as a need to revert how things are working? > all this assuming that it is required to be member for uploading parts > of X, regardless what upstrem tree. but if policy is that way, maybe > this question also needs to be discussed a second time. Having only five or six people with SVN commit access does not mean that others cannot contribute. If you feel that this is wrong, please explain us why. Fabio -- fajita: step one Whatever the problem, step one is always to look in the error log. fajita: step two When in danger or in doubt, step two is to scream and shout.
