Bug#434047: libxrandr2: Compiz fail to refresh with version 2:1.2.1-1
- To: Jaime Ochoa Malagón <chptma@gmail.com>
- Cc: 434047@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#434047: libxrandr2: Compiz fail to refresh with version 2:1.2.1-1
- From: Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@ens-lyon.org>
- Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 21:29:39 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 46B62523.2020606@ens-lyon.org>
- Reply-to: Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@ens-lyon.org>, 434047@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <b74f22e0707212348h34555dafs5521330c57a40945@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <b74f22e0707202345v1f9c1839hdd047a9fb6a6aec0@mail.gmail.com> <handler.434047.B.11850003422849.ack@bugs.debian.org> <b74f22e0707210000t5b8d38e0y9813d060db2b8c3b@mail.gmail.com> <46A1CDCA.7080300@ens-lyon.org> <b74f22e0707212348h34555dafs5521330c57a40945@mail.gmail.com>
reassign 434047 nvidia-glx
retitle 434047 nvidia-glx interaction issues with libXrandr 1.2 causes Compiz to not refresh correctly
thank you
Jaime Ochoa Malagón wrote:
> I understand the requirements and I pretend to use nv driver to test
> it, I'm not sure if this is posible but I'll try...
>
> I just upgrade nvidia-glx to the last version and the behaivor is
> consistent...
>
> I need to ask it sorry to bother
> If I use to have nvidia 0.9746-2 and change to 100.14.11-1 and
> If I use to have compiz 0.2.2-1 and change to 0.5.0.dfsg-2 and
> I have beryl 0.2.0*
>
> the only change is libxrandr2 upgrade and downgrade and the other apps
> works with the old version and not with the new one...
>
> I guess something change between the version that's is not new and the
> behaivor has changed at least for amd64...
>
> I'll try to reproduce with another driver, just will take me a litle
> time just change nv for nvidia doesn't do the trick...
I can't reproduce the problem with ati or intel drivers. And it is known
that nvidia-glx doesn't support randr-1.2 yet. It should be able to
interact with the randr-1.1 compatibility layer in the server, but maybe
it does not, causing your problem here. So I am reassigning the bug
accordingly.
Brice
Reply to: