[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: X broken after upgrade



On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 09:25:09PM -0500, Jeffrey Nowakowski wrote:
> I'm using testing, with no packages from unstable.  I'm also using
> gdm.
> 
> First, while upgrading a bunch of packages yesterday I got an error
> upgrading the x11-common package.  Second, after rebooting I get some
> nasty looking kernel messages in the logs.  I have included both
> errors below, along with a list of installed packages in case that
> helps.

Assuming all your packages are from testing, you've apparently
discovered two bugs.

> x11-common upgrade error:
> -------------------------
> Preparing to replace x11-common 6.8.2.dfsg.1-11 (using .../x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-4_all.deb) ...
> Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
> dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-4_all.deb (--unpack):
>  trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package libxft-dev

This is a bug in either libxft-dev or x11-common.  You should file a bug
report to both.  In the mean-time you can force one to overwrite the
other's /usr/include/X11 using 'dpkg --force-overwrite'.  It is probably
safer to have x11-common overwrite libxft-dev.

> /var/log/messages error:
> ------------------------
> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel: [drm] AGP 0.99 Aperture @ 0xe0000000 64MB
> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel: [drm] Initialized radeon 1.7.0 20020828 on minor 0
> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel:  printing eip:
> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel: f89db9c8
> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel: Oops: 0000

[...]

> Mar  5 20:16:12 localhost kernel: Process Xorg (pid: 1433, stackpage=f3b4b000)

This is *probably* a bug in Xorg's radeon driver, but possibly one in
the kernel.  (The fact that a bug in Xorg can do this is itself a major
design flaw in X, but that is another matter).  A bug should be filed
against the Xorg package.  To fix it, you might want to look into newer
(or older) versions of Xorg.  (That is a lot of work, though).



Reply to: