Re: What is the status of Xorg 7.0?
Jan Brons wrote:
> I am wondering if the Xorg 7.0 update problems are solved. I am using
> Sid AMD64 and just want to do a apt-update but are mainly waiting for
> most of the Xorg problems are solved. If I do an update I see for
> example that xserver-common 6.9 xfree86-common and xprint are going
> to be removed. Can't find this to be an safe option! I am no Xorg
> expert, so can anyone give me a clue?
>
I have just aptitude dist-upgraded a few day ago and all is working fine.
miguel@debian:~$ dpkg -l|grep xorg
ii libglu1-xorg 7.0.14
transitional package for Debian etch
ii xorg 7.0.14 X.Org X
Window System
ii xserver-xorg 7.0.14 the
X.Org X server
ii xserver-xorg-core 1.0.2-5 X.Org X
server -- core server
ii xserver-xorg-input-all 7.0.14 the
X.Org X server -- input driver metapacka
ii xserver-xorg-input-evdev 1.0.0.5-2 X.Org X
server -- evdev input driver
ii xserver-xorg-input-kbd 1.0.1.3-2 X.Org X
server -- keyboard input driver
ii xserver-xorg-input-mouse 1.0.4-2 X.Org X
server -- mouse input driver
ii xserver-xorg-input-synaptics 0.14.4-4
Synaptics TouchPad driver for X.Org/XFree86
You should do the following:
# aptitude update
# aptitude -d upgrade
(this is for just downloading the .debs)
then, when all is downloaded, logout your graphical desktop (no reboot
nor shutdown), change to a VT, CTRL + ALT + F1 for example, and execute
as root
# /etc/init/gdm stop
# cp /etc/X11/xorg.conf /etc/X11/xorg.conf.backup.6.9
# aptitude upgrade
(this will begin the instalation of new .debs)
if X11 doesnt start try
#dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg
remember to check /var/log/Xorg.0.log for errors (lines beginning with (EE))
you can start X alone (without a desktop manager) as normal user with
$ X
if you can see a black and white pattern and a cursor, all is ok.
When all is ok, you can start your desktop manager with:
# /etc/init.d/gdm start
Try it!
P.D If you can't start X and need to search the internet for help, use
links, lynx or elinks. They are text-mode web browsers.
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Jan.
>
>
Reply to: