Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 233883 fixed-upstream
Bug#233883: gnome-session: very slow to shut down (checkpoint?) xterm windows
Tags were: help
Tags added: fixed-upstream
> tag 233883 - help
Bug#233883: gnome-session: very slow to shut down (checkpoint?) xterm windows
Tags we
Branden Robinson wrote:
What character set was the attached diff in? I can't get it to make any
sense. Part of it looks like badly-decomposed UTF-8, and part of it
looks like properly-encoded ISO-8859-15.
The old character map was ISO-8859-13. This patch should change
encoding to UTF-8 (
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 08:56:11AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> tag 233883 fixed-upstream
> tag 233883 - help
> reassign 233883 xterm
> thanks
>
> Le dim 09/05/2004 ? 20:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a ?crit :
> >Debian Bug report logs - #233883
> > > gnome-session: very
We offer the
widest range of drugs available and
provide
access to
complimentary online
medical
consultations.
%RND_AD_2
Plus: %RND_ALL_OTHER_MEDS
We accept almost
every form of
payment.
Enjoy deep discount
meds here..
Use Microsoft Internet Explorer to view the following website:
Your comfort and convenience is our prime concern. Once your application is filled out and approved by one of our doctors, the medication will arrive at your home or office in discreet packaging.
%RND_AD_2
Plus: %RND_ALL_OTHER_MEDS
No embarassment ? prescriptions are always confidential.
Be
On Mon, 24 May 2004, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Bruno Majewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-11 18:28]:
> > (11)Configuring XF86 was painless due to the fact I had read-edid +
> > mdetect installed and rebooted afterwards, before installing XF86. The
> > installer (or is it debconf?) made it
Para realizar peticiones contacte con nosotros en [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 12:10:14 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1439
Modified:
trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
trunk/debian/README
Log:
Fix typo in declared range for SuperH patches.
Modified: trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 12:13:16 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1440
Modified:
trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
trunk/debian/control
trunk/debian/patches/600_amd64_support.diff
trunk/debian/xserver-xfree86.config.in
Log:
Add more patches for AMD64 support.
* Declare a default
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 03:13:50PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > Thank you for including the amd64 patches to the xfree86 SVN trunk.
> >
> > I compiled the current xfree86 SVN trunk version with a small additional
> > patch (see below) for amd64 a
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 03:13:50PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> Thank you for including the amd64 patches to the xfree86 SVN trunk.
>
> I compiled the current xfree86 SVN trunk version with a small additional
> patch (see below) for amd64 and tested the resulting packages on my
> dual-opteron
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 15:07:08 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1441
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/CHANGESETS
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/control
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/patches/600_amd64_support.diff
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/xserver-xfree86.config.in
Log:
Merge
Author: fabbione
Date: 2004-05-25 15:13:07 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1442
Modified:
branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
Log:
Change uploader prior upload
Modified: branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/changelog
===
--- branches
On Tue, 25 May 2004, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin wrote:
> Author: branden
> Date: 2004-05-25 15:07:08 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
> New Revision: 1441
>
> Modified:
>branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/CHANGESETS
>branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/control
>branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/patches/600_amd6
I am sorry that it took so long to review your application but
you were finally
app rov ed with 3% fixed ra t e. To get
[Full Lo a n Appro v al] visit
this page and
enter final details. The bank office manager will contact
you about your lo a n
asap.
Thank you and we appr
Just to say that I experienced this problem with my Radeon 7500 DVI/CRT
dual head card. I rebooted my box last weekend after 115 days uptime -
during which X was upgraded. After reboot, instead of producing a
separate display on each monitor, the same display was duplicated on
both. I had made
package: xserver-xfree86
version: 4.3.0.dfsg1-1
Greetings,
I'm not sure wheter this is a xserver bug, but for me it is not possible to
draw a connection to the correct package.
Howerver:
System: Debian Testing, nearly clean. (Woody base-system dist-upgraded via
apt, then task x-window-system inst
Probably you are the uploader of the following file(s) in
the Debian upload queue directory:
xfree86_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2.diff.gz
xfree86_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2.dsc
This looks like an upload, but a .changes file is missing, so the job
cannot be processed.
If no .changes file arrives within 23:24:20, the fil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 22:11:46 +0200
Source: xfree86
Binary: libx11-6-dbg libxtst6-dbg xserver-common xlibs-static-dev libxp6-dbg
xbase-clients xlibmesa3-dbg libxtrap6-dbg xfonts-75dpi libxt6 libice6-dbg xmh
libxaw6-dbg x-dev libxv1 libx
Author: branden
Revision: 1442
Property Name: svn:log
New Property Value:
Set uploader field for package release.
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 18:04:26 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1443
Added:
tags/4.3.0.dfsg.1-2/
Log:
Tag 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2 release.
Copied: tags/4.3.0.dfsg.1-2 (from rev 1442, branches/4.3.0/sid)
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#248539: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#246901: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#242485: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#234808: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#223926: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#219551: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#218169: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#179407: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#178812: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 18:11:32 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1444
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Merge revision 1334 and revisions 1427 to HEAD from branches/4.3.0/sid.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#107769: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#189764: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#198910: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#219551: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 18:13:04 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1445
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Begin new entry.
Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- trunk/debian/changelog 2004-05-25 23:11:32
xfree86_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
xfree86_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2.dsc
xfree86_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2.diff.gz
lbxproxy_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdps1_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdps-dev_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#222530: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#234025: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#234025: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#240581: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:46 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#240889: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#241717: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#245044: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#245249: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 18:14:52 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1446
Modified:
trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
trunk/debian/TODO
Log:
Update for forthcoming release.
Modified: trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
===
--- trunk/deb
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#247525: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#247705: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#248632: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#249738: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Your message dated Tue, 25 May 2004 18:47:47 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#250061: fixed in xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
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
Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-25 18:35:24 -0500 (Tue, 25 May 2004)
New Revision: 1447
Modified:
trunk/debian/TODO
Log:
Update item.
Modified: trunk/debian/TODO
===
--- trunk/debian/TODO 2004-05-25 23:14:52 UTC (rev 1446)
+++ tr
Accepted:
lbxproxy_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/lbxproxy_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdps-dev_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/libdps-dev_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xfree86/libdps1-dbg_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb
libdp
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
x-window-system-dev_4.3.0.dfsg.1-2_i386.deb: package says priority is extra,
override says optional.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is co
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 08:39:50AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> Hey Branden, I received the commit message for the merge! (revision 1437)
> but i am having problems to access the svn repo via ssh. I can see the ssh
> session is going up, but there is no data transfer at all.
>
> trunk/xf
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:48:45AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 01:55:27AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure what's going on, but I can reproduce it with stock
> > 4.3.0.dfsg.1-1.
>
> W
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> retitle 237583 xlibs: BKSL key doesn't work when 'us' is one of multiple
> layouts
Bug#237583: xlibs: [XKB] us keymap, bar/backslash symbol doesn't work as it's
supposed to
Change
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> retitle 230204 xserver-xfree86: [os-support/linux] pressing unknown key
> causes spew of 'atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It shouldn't access hardware
> directly.' to kernel log
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 01:54:19PM +0200, Björn wrote:
> fre 2004-05-21 klockan 09.07 skrev Branden Robinson:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 02:53:24PM +0200, Björn Nitzler wrote:
> > > Good afternoon, a brief test report. following the nice instructions it
> > > builds
> > > fine. libx11-dev fails
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 242664 xserver-xfree86: X clients take minutes instead of seconds to
> open, and CPU load goes as high as 5
Bug#242664: xserver-xfree86: [fbdev] clients take minutes instead of seconds to
open, and CPU load goes as high as 5
Changed Bug title.
On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 02:26:53AM +0200, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Please report success or failure to this discussion thread.
>
> I just built SVN HEAD (exported at 2004-05-19 17:00 UTC) and it works
> great on my ATI Rage128 Mobility M3.
retitle 242664 xserver-xfree86: X clients take minutes instead of seconds to
open, and CPU load goes as high as 5
retitle 249154 xserver-xfree86: many apps slow to start up after X upgrade
severity 242664 normal
severity 249154 normal
merge 242664 249154
# remove all tags
tag 242664 =
close 242664
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 01:54:21AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I could use some assistance with this bug from someone conversation with
> Russian localization issuess and/or XKB.
Someone *conversant* with these subjects would be good, too.
/me laments his chronic case of Alzheimer's
--
G.
On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 01:14:54AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 07:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > Mr. Dänzer, any idea what we should ask this gentleman for?
>
> I don't have anything to ask, but something to say: the DRI drivers in
> XFree86 4.3 are old and unmaintai
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 02:31:40PM +0200, Patric Ljung wrote:
> I've downloaded and compiled X11R6.7 (and also XFree86 4.4.0).
> Then I installed Xorg (make install install.man). But, that
> of course results in problems with the Debian packages depending
> on X (xbase-common, xbase-clients, etc).
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 11:20:07AM +0200, Alberto wrote:
> I have got a monitor that is not in the monitor database. I have
> *full* specs for it, and would like it to be added. Where do I
> have to submit this info?
To what database are you referring?
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> retitle 249614 xserver-xfree86: [debconf] autodetect SGI Indy and Indigo2
> systems
Bug#249614: Automatic X configuration for SGI Indy/Indigo2
Changed Bug title.
>
End of message,
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1
> tags 248539 - moreinfo
Bug#248539: libxrandr2: No need to conflict with xlibs
There were no tags set.
Tags removed: moreinfo
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please con
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:33:13PM -0500, Einar Jørgensen wrote:
> Package: xbase-clients
> Version: 4.3.0-7
> Severity: normal
> Followup-For: Bug #236256
* Your bug contained no actual followup, just boilerplate material
supplied by reportbug.
* 4.3.0-7 is out of date even in Debian sarge. P
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 10:38:10AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 08:00:19AM +0200, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > (This is no cause to rejoice for people who hate the colors I chose for
> > Debian's xterm years ago, however; it appears I have won Mr. Dickey
> > over, and he and
We are your online source for obtaining original branded prescription medications and works in partnership with the leaders in licensed wholesale drug sales and dispensing.
%RND_AD_2
Plus: %RND_ALL_OTHER_MEDS
Play an active role and participate more fully in your own process of care.
Buy on
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 08:00:15PM +0200, Miquel (a.k.a Ktal) wrote:
> Package: xterm
> Version: 4.3.0-7
>
> When the xterm package is installed, you open an xterm and you can see a
> "beautiful" black console terminal with no prompt and no characters. This is
> because the background color is
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 01:40:10PM +0200, Max Kutny wrote:
> Package: xterm
> Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-1
> Severity: normal
>
> Selecting any text in abiword editor and pasting it with middle mouse
> button into opened exterm window crashes xterm. xterm nicely performs
> with pastes from other applic
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi guys,
please update the override files to reflect the new Priority for
x-window-system-dev.
Thanks
Fabio
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Debian Installer wrote:
> There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
> override file
Could something based on this patch, or one of the other suggestions in
the bug log, be applied?
[Overquoting for history, since this was a while back.]
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 05:52:53PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 02:45:59PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On S
75 matches
Mail list logo
