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

Re: Sid on PowerPC has broken xserver-xorg-core



	Hi!

* Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> [2010-01-19 15:00:11 CET]:
> Interesting... The culprit turned out to be the xserver-xorg-input-wacom 
> driver.  At first I removed all the video drivers that weren't mentioned 
> in Xorg.0.log.  That didn't solve the problem, but made it clear that 
> there were still problems with the input drivers.  So I removed those I 
> knew I wasn't using and that solved the problem.  Then I re-installed 
> the video and input drivers I had removed - one by one, until I started 
> seeing conflicts again.  I was able to put back everything but the wacom 
> input driver.
> 
> Now, the question is: how do we get the wacom input driver fixed? 
> Should I submit a bug report against xserver-xorg-input-wacom?  What 
> should I say is the problem?

 I guess this just means the package hasn't got built yet:
<http://packages.debian.org/sid/xserver-xorg-input-wacom> lists an older
version of the package for powerpc.

 The build logs for the package speak a clear picture:
 <https://buildd.debian.org/~luk/status/package.php?p=xf86-input-wacom&suite=unstable>
It failed on quite some architectures. It might be that the
build-dependencies weren't set tight enough and it stumbled through that
into old versions or similar. I'd hope one of the buildd admins will try
a give-back at some point, or that the package maintainer (hi, Ron!)
would notice the build issues.

 Just a special side note: When you use unstable you are expected to
figure out such things because that's what happens regularly in
unstable and you are expected to be able to track down the issue on your
own. Digging through the buildd logs isn't magic. ;)  Actually, I would
guess ron is aware of the build problems, but the package hasn't
received a FTBFS yet - that would hint into that a build in a current
clean sid chroot might give a good chance; or maybe it just wasn't filed
yet.

 Hope that helps!
Rhonda


Reply to: