severity 163885 normal thanks This is the worst bug report I've seen in a long time, but then I've grown accustomed to such from the person who hides behind the nom de annoyance "Lazarus Long". On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 12:54:01AM +0000, Lazarus Long wrote: > Package: xserver-xfree86 > Version: N/A Horse puckey. I don't support Red Hat packages. Tell me which version of the official Debian packages you're running or see your report closed. > Severity: important > > (Probably higher severity, due to hardware threat, but ... ?) "hardware threat"? What the heck is that? > (Invoked as user, with a plain "startx" command line) > > (protocol Version 11, revision 0, vendor release 6600) I notice you excised the line that reveals the build information. Furthermore, your server log is missing a *lot* of information. Did you trim this down? Where is the unadulterated /var/log/XFree86.*.log file? Have you read XF86Config(7)? Why have you not supplied the information that is requested, and required for the resolution of most bug reports? If it is too much trouble for you to gather the requisite information, I recommend the "reportbug" package and command; it will gather it for you. > (EE) R128(0): [dri] R128DRIScreenInit failed because of a version mismatch. > [dri] r128.o kernel module version is 2.1.6 but version 2.2 or greater is needed. > [dri] Disabling the DRI. Okay, so souped-up 3D acceleration won't work because your kernel is too old. This is in no way an "important" bug. We have people who can't even start the X server because it coredumps. That's "important". > (EE) R128(0): [drm] failed to remove DRM signal handler > DRIUnlock called when not locked I'll note to no one in particular that the X server should probably set a global variable tracking whether drm was initialized, and not bother to remove a signal handler that never got established. But this is a pretty minor complaint. > (EE) xf86OpenSerial: Cannot open device /dev/input/mice > No such file or directory. > (EE) Generic Mouse: cannot open input device > (EE) PreInit failed for input device "Generic Mouse" These are harmless and simply the result of my efforts to support USB mice without any intervention on the part of the user. Blisfully, it's evidence that you are actually running Debian, and not trying to trick me into supporting Red Hat or SuSE. > _IceTransmkdir: Owner of /tmp/.ICE-unix should be set to root > SESSION_MANAGER=local/farm:/tmp/.ICE-unix/5500 > SetKbdSettings - type: 2 rate: 30 delay: 500 snumlk: 0 > SetKbdSettings - Succeeded > Warning: This version of gmix was compiled with > OSS version 3.8.2, and your system is running > version 3.8.16. > X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown). > Gdk-ERROR **: X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown). > xinit: connection to X server lost. > X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown). > xscreensaver-gl-helper: couldn't open display :0.0 > X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown). These all have to do with your X clients and aren't germane to your bug report. > (I Alt-Ctrl-Backspace'd here, due to the screen mess and fear of hardware > damage.) Fear of hardware damage? What are you smoking? XFree86 and the kernel couldn't agree on a protocol for melting the heat sink on your 3D-accelerated graphics card to slag while animating multitextured NURBS porn. You should be grateful; not using DRI probably keeps your computer chassis ten degrees cooler. > The kernel is 2.4.19, so I'm not sure how to get any more recent version > of this kernel module. Did you compile this against a 2.5.X box perhaps? No. > Hmmm, no, I see "Build Operating System: Linux 2.4.18 i686 [ELF]" > so that's not it. Where did you manage to get something more recent > than what's in the current stable kernel, while running a current-1 > kernel version? Odd, at best. XFree86 periodically does CVS merges from the DRI project at SourceForge. Those guys also develop the DRM modules that live inside the kernel, so the Linux kernel hackers periodically sync up with them as well. The release cycles of XFree86 and the Linux kernel are not in sync. There is not a lot that Debian can do about this. It was my understanding that DRI on the XFree86 side was supposed to maintain backward compatibility, but apparently that didn't happen. Not sure what's going on here. Michel Dänzer reads the debian-x list; perhaps he knows. > I had hoped 4.2.1-2 would fix this, so held off on filing until trying > that, but it still has the same problem. This problem was not present > in 4.1.0-whatever (sarge) versions and only showed up in 4.2.1-1, to > my awareness. > > What further info would you like? What would you like me to test? I'd like to see the information described in XF86Config(7). Other than that this problem probably isn't easily resolvable. I don't recommend that you run a 2.5.x kernel. For that matter I'm not sure Linus has DRI version 2.2 modules in his tree -- I simply have no idea. Michel, you're up on DRI affairs, what's going on here? :) -- G. Branden Robinson | The greatest productive force is Debian GNU/Linux | human selfishness. branden@debian.org | -- Robert Heinlein http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpYqZInSE9DL.pgp
Description: PGP signature