Hello,
I am experiencing something real strange. Yesterday all worked fine, but
i did an upgrade, and didn't reboot until this morning.
This morning i booted in, all worked fine, but as i was using mutt or
something, i noticed that my Alt-Gr key seems to be not working, which
is real unpleasant s
Subject: This is an AutoResponse from eBay
Thank you for your response. As this is an automated email, please do not reply.
If you have a question for eBay Customer Support, please visit the following
eBay Help page. This page will help you locate the answer to your question,
or assist you in
here is a patch i use for my multi-user workstation with multiple
monitors/mice/keyboards. it limits the reset of the pci bus to
one card with a given busID, if a busID is specified with the
-prefbusid X:X:X option. if no such option is given, everything
behaves as allways.
the patch was written b
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 03:00:43PM -0600, Jeremy Nickurak wrote:
> > > Is there a straightforward way to try a patch-free build? I do have a
> > > tree here that's ready and able to compile the pre1v1 release...
> >
> > Sure. dpkg-source -x the source package and then:
> >
> > $ rm debian/patche
On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 11:50:28PM +0200, Yann Forget wrote:
> I got an error while trying to install XF86 4.3.0 from experimental which
> would solve my problem :
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2003/debian-x-200308/msg00263.html
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo dpkg -i
> /var/cache/apt/archive
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 10:44:45PM +0200, Wilfried Goesgens wrote:
> Wouldn't it be usefull, to add the output of
> 'lspci |grep VGA' to the pci-ID selection dialog?
Way ahead of you. Tried something similar years ago.
Doesn't work, because there is no way to escape newlines within a debconf
co
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 12:20:35AM +0200, wilfried Goesgens wrote:
> On the system there are installed
> ii xlibmesa3-glu 4.2.1-6Mesa OpenGL utility library [XFree86]
> which aren't superceeded by the 4.3 version ones...
> by now one has to force-remove the old one and install the new o
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:41:49AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > GL Xscreensaver hacks running full screen flicker terribly as if
> > refreshes are happening randomly.
>
> The consensus among DRI developers is that this seems to be an
> xscreensaver bug, it seems to make bogus assumptions about
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:51:21AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> (BTW, heads up to XSF: the keyboard manpage is still missing)
File a bug, please; or, since you *do* have commit access to the
repository, could you consider trying a fix yourself?
--
G. Branden Robinson|It was
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 02:18:59PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 09:57:09PM -0500, X Strike Force SVN Admin wrote:
> > - don't show the user messages telling him we're not doing anything
>
> Women use Debian, too. :P
That's just a nasty rumor.
Anyway, if you'd like to re
V I R U S A L A R M
Unser eMail-Virenscanner hat den/die Virus(e)
Worm/Sobig.F virus
in Deiner Mail an:
-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gefunden.
Bitte ueberpruefe Dein System, ob Du einen Virus "eingefangen" hast,
oder bitte Deinen Administrator, dies zu tun.
Um Dir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:58:08 -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
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 12:39:54 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 415
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
debian/changelog: correct some wrong information (who says you can't update
a changelog entry to be correct after the fact? Take THAT, Christian
Marillat!)
Modified:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The backwards incompatibility of libc in unstable combined with my use
of a commercial X server leaves me...a little stuck. Attempts to simply
use the old libraries by overriding LD_LIBRARY_PATH have failed. Another
suggestion was to run the server chr
~
Regarding your recent e-mail to Macromedia:
Macromedia recently received an e-mail, from this e-mail
address, that we are unable to process. Additional actions
may be required to fulfill your particular comments or request.
We have provi
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#201750: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#195418: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#195845: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#181579: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#164021: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#201586: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:41 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#206141: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#199830: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#138195: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:41 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#203460: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#149482: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#200699: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
X Strike Force SVN Admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - debian/control: add build-conflict with gcc-3.3 (<< 3.3.2-0pre1)
[...]
> +Build-Conflicts: gcc-3.3 (<< 3.3.2-0pre1)
Unfortunately this is missing the epoch, rendering the Build-Conflict
ineffective...
| auric$ madison gcc-3.3
| [...]
|
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:37:08 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line [EMAIL PROTECTED]: bug #55068]
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your res
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 19:34:27 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 416
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/control
Log:
debian/control: add gcc's epoch to versioned Build-Conflict on gcc-3.3
(thanks, James Troup)
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
==
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 22:47:03 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 417
Modified:
README
Log:
README: updated to tell people about alternatives to ViewCVS for public
view of the repository
Modified: README
===
---
Hello,
I am experiencing something real strange. Yesterday all worked fine, but
i did an upgrade, and didn't reboot until this morning.
This morning i booted in, all worked fine, but as i was using mutt or
something, i noticed that my Alt-Gr key seems to be not working, which
is real unpleasant s
Subject: This is an AutoResponse from eBay
Thank you for your response. As this is an automated email, please do not reply.
If you have a question for eBay Customer Support, please visit the following
eBay Help page. This page will help you locate the answer to your question,
or assist you in
here is a patch i use for my multi-user workstation with multiple
monitors/mice/keyboards. it limits the reset of the pci bus to
one card with a given busID, if a busID is specified with the
-prefbusid X:X:X option. if no such option is given, everything
behaves as allways.
the patch was written b
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 03:00:43PM -0600, Jeremy Nickurak wrote:
> > > Is there a straightforward way to try a patch-free build? I do have a
> > > tree here that's ready and able to compile the pre1v1 release...
> >
> > Sure. dpkg-source -x the source package and then:
> >
> > $ rm debian/patche
On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 11:50:28PM +0200, Yann Forget wrote:
> I got an error while trying to install XF86 4.3.0 from experimental which
> would solve my problem :
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2003/debian-x-200308/msg00263.html
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo dpkg -i
> /var/cache/apt/archive
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 10:44:45PM +0200, Wilfried Goesgens wrote:
> Wouldn't it be usefull, to add the output of
> 'lspci |grep VGA' to the pci-ID selection dialog?
Way ahead of you. Tried something similar years ago.
Doesn't work, because there is no way to escape newlines within a debconf
co
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 12:20:35AM +0200, wilfried Goesgens wrote:
> On the system there are installed
> ii xlibmesa3-glu 4.2.1-6Mesa OpenGL utility library [XFree86]
> which aren't superceeded by the 4.3 version ones...
> by now one has to force-remove the old one and install the new o
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:41:49AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > GL Xscreensaver hacks running full screen flicker terribly as if
> > refreshes are happening randomly.
>
> The consensus among DRI developers is that this seems to be an
> xscreensaver bug, it seems to make bogus assumptions about
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:51:21AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> (BTW, heads up to XSF: the keyboard manpage is still missing)
File a bug, please; or, since you *do* have commit access to the
repository, could you consider trying a fix yourself?
--
G. Branden Robinson|It was
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 02:18:59PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 09:57:09PM -0500, X Strike Force SVN Admin wrote:
> > - don't show the user messages telling him we're not doing anything
>
> Women use Debian, too. :P
That's just a nasty rumor.
Anyway, if you'd like to re
V I R U S A L A R M
Unser eMail-Virenscanner hat den/die Virus(e)
Worm/Sobig.F virus
in Deiner Mail an:
-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gefunden.
Bitte ueberpruefe Dein System, ob Du einen Virus "eingefangen" hast,
oder bitte Deinen Administrator, dies zu tun.
Um Dir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:58:08 -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
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 12:39:54 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 415
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
debian/changelog: correct some wrong information (who says you can't update
a changelog entry to be correct after the fact? Take THAT, Christian
Marillat!)
Modified:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The backwards incompatibility of libc in unstable combined with my use
of a commercial X server leaves me...a little stuck. Attempts to simply
use the old libraries by overriding LD_LIBRARY_PATH have failed. Another
suggestion was to run the server chr
~
Regarding your recent e-mail to Macromedia:
Macromedia recently received an e-mail, from this e-mail
address, that we are unable to process. Additional actions
may be required to fulfill your particular comments or request.
We have provi
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#201750: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#195845: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#195418: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#181579: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#164021: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#201586: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:41 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#206141: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#138195: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:41 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#203460: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#149482: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#199830: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:04:40 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#200699: fixed in xfree86 4.2.1-10
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 y
X Strike Force SVN Admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - debian/control: add build-conflict with gcc-3.3 (<< 3.3.2-0pre1)
[...]
> +Build-Conflicts: gcc-3.3 (<< 3.3.2-0pre1)
Unfortunately this is missing the epoch, rendering the Build-Conflict
ineffective...
| auric$ madison gcc-3.3
| [...]
|
Your message dated Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:37:08 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line [EMAIL PROTECTED]: bug #55068]
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your res
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 19:34:27 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 416
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/control
Log:
debian/control: add gcc's epoch to versioned Build-Conflict on gcc-3.3
(thanks, James Troup)
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
==
Author: branden
Date: 2003-08-20 22:47:03 -0500 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003)
New Revision: 417
Modified:
README
Log:
README: updated to tell people about alternatives to ViewCVS for public
view of the repository
Modified: README
===
---
62 matches
Mail list logo
