Branden Robinson wrote:
> Dpkg is wrong, of course.
>
> Dpkg has no mechanism to handle conffiles disappearing across upgrades.
Is this just an implementation choice in dpkg, or is there
insufficient information in the existing .deb files to enable
dpkg to, say, remove unmodified configuration fi
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: grave
Server is unable to launch. See attached log.
00:0c.0 VGA compatible controller: Texas Instruments TVP4020 [Permedia 2] (rev
01)
00:0c.0 Class 0300: 104c:3d07 (rev 01)
### BEGIN DEBCONF SECTION
# XF86Config-4 (XFree86 server configuratio
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 14:34:50 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#182473: Server unable to launch with xserver-xfree86 and
permedia2 card
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 11:26:02AM +, Roland Turner wrote:
> Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > Dpkg is wrong, of course.
> >
> > Dpkg has no mechanism to handle conffiles disappearing across upgrades.
>
> Is this just an implementation choice in dpkg, or is there
> insufficient information in the
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 173314 xbase-clients: [xcalc] should accept digits from the
> alphabetic part of the keyboard
Bug#173314: xbase-clients: [xcalc] only accepts digits typed on numeric keypad
Changed Bug title.
> severity 173314 wishlist
Bug#173314: xbase-client
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 16:01:40 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#144351: xscreensaver-gnome: gnomecc use crashes server
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:29:47PM -0500, Bob Parnes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 12:59:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[...]
> > Please mail this bug the information described in the XF86Config(7)
> > manual page.
[...]
> Sorry, I had not read the man page, did not realize it's importance
On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 11:42:22AM -0500, Bob Parnes wrote:
> 1. I was able to install version 4.2 from the tar file, using the
> install script provided by the xfree86 website.
>
> 2. A debian installation of version 4.2 succeeded on another computer.
>
> 3. On the original computer, I tried run
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 128101 xserver-xfree86: [ati] starting another local X server from
> within xterm on local X server while using atyfb causes lockup
Bug#128101: gdmflexiserver results in lock-up
Changed Bug title.
> severity 128101 important
Bug#128101: xserve
retitle 173849 xfs: [type1] crash when using huge font: 'Beziers this big not
yet supported; We have REALLY run out of memory'
reassign 173849 xserver-xfree86
severity 173849 important
merge 107917 173849
thanks
M. Coulon,
The actual big is in a static library that is linked into both the
XFree8
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 06:00:04PM +0300, peter novodvorsky wrote:
> Package: xterm
> Version: 4.1.0-16
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> I would be good, if xterm worked with russian fonts in russian locale by
> default. Solution is to add file XTerm-color:
>
> XTerm*Font: -cronyx-fixed-med
> > > The lockup occurs under the following
> > > condition:
> > >
> > > the frame buffer device (atyfb) is loaded and used by console. Start a
> > > second X-server from an xterm on the first X-server.
> > > If I start a second X-server from the console, even a fb-enabled console,
> > > there is n
Package: xfree86-common
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: normal
Linda spits out:
E: xfree86-common; xfree86-common is in /etc/init.d, but not marked as a
conffile.
Which, from my checking looks to be a valid error.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Lin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:01:32 -0500
Source: xfree86
Binary: xlibmesa3-gl xserver-common libxaw7-dbg xlibmesa-glu-dev xbase-clients
twm xlibmesa3-dbg xfonts-scalable xfonts-75dpi libdps1-dbg xmh libxaw6-dbg xfwp
xlibs xlibosmesa3-dbg xli
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#180195: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#179731: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178310: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#175996: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178374: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178310: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178289: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#36184: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now you
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178600: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Branden Robinson wrote:
> Dpkg is wrong, of course.
>
> Dpkg has no mechanism to handle conffiles disappearing across upgrades.
Is this just an implementation choice in dpkg, or is there
insufficient information in the existing .deb files to enable
dpkg to, say, remove unmodified configuration fi
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: grave
Server is unable to launch. See attached log.
00:0c.0 VGA compatible controller: Texas Instruments TVP4020 [Permedia 2] (rev 01)
00:0c.0 Class 0300: 104c:3d07 (rev 01)
### BEGIN DEBCONF SECTION
# XF86Config-4 (XFree86 server configuration
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 14:34:50 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#182473: Server unable to launch with xserver-xfree86 and
permedia2 card
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 11:26:02AM +, Roland Turner wrote:
> Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > Dpkg is wrong, of course.
> >
> > Dpkg has no mechanism to handle conffiles disappearing across upgrades.
>
> Is this just an implementation choice in dpkg, or is there
> insufficient information in the
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 173314 xbase-clients: [xcalc] should accept digits from the alphabetic part
> of the keyboard
Bug#173314: xbase-clients: [xcalc] only accepts digits typed on numeric keypad
Changed Bug title.
> severity 173314 wishlist
Bug#173314: xbase-client
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 16:01:40 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#144351: xscreensaver-gnome: gnomecc use crashes server
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:29:47PM -0500, Bob Parnes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 12:59:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[...]
> > Please mail this bug the information described in the XF86Config(7)
> > manual page.
[...]
> Sorry, I had not read the man page, did not realize it's importance
On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 11:42:22AM -0500, Bob Parnes wrote:
> 1. I was able to install version 4.2 from the tar file, using the
> install script provided by the xfree86 website.
>
> 2. A debian installation of version 4.2 succeeded on another computer.
>
> 3. On the original computer, I tried run
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 128101 xserver-xfree86: [ati] starting another local X server from within
> xterm on local X server while using atyfb causes lockup
Bug#128101: gdmflexiserver results in lock-up
Changed Bug title.
> severity 128101 important
Bug#128101: xserve
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 06:00:04PM +0300, peter novodvorsky wrote:
> Package: xterm
> Version: 4.1.0-16
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> I would be good, if xterm worked with russian fonts in russian locale by
> default. Solution is to add file XTerm-color:
>
> XTerm*Font: -cronyx-fixed-med
retitle 173849 xfs: [type1] crash when using huge font: 'Beziers this big not yet
supported; We have REALLY run out of memory'
reassign 173849 xserver-xfree86
severity 173849 important
merge 107917 173849
thanks
M. Coulon,
The actual big is in a static library that is linked into both the
XFree8
> > > The lockup occurs under the following
> > > condition:
> > >
> > > the frame buffer device (atyfb) is loaded and used by console. Start a
> > > second X-server from an xterm on the first X-server.
> > > If I start a second X-server from the console, even a fb-enabled console,
> > > there is n
Package: xfree86-common
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: normal
Linda spits out:
E: xfree86-common; xfree86-common is in /etc/init.d, but not marked as a
conffile.
Which, from my checking looks to be a valid error.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Lin
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#180195: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#179731: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178310: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178374: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178310: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#175996: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:43 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178289: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#36184: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now you
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178496: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178600: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Your message dated Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:03:44 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178465: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now yo
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.2.1-5
Severity: normal
Easiest test is to run glxgears and observe the blank window. I have made
no hardware changes recently but it's been a while since I tried any 3D
stuff. I have no easy way to verify that the 3D parts of the card are not
somehow physicall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:01:32 -0500
Source: xfree86
Binary: xlibmesa3-gl xserver-common libxaw7-dbg xlibmesa-glu-dev xbase-clients twm
xlibmesa3-dbg xfonts-scalable xfonts-75dpi libdps1-dbg xmh libxaw6-dbg xfwp xlibs
xlibosmesa3-dbg xli
66 matches
Mail list logo
