Re: Xorg 7.2
* Steve Langasek: unstable doesn't mean it's ok to upload packages with known bugs that render the system unusable to many users and drives them away from using unstable because they're using non-free software and that shouldn't matter to us. The consequences of breaking Java for most users (whether they're using it in the form packaged in non-free or not) would be an increased volume of (duplicate) bug reports for the XSF and, if the problem remains unresolved, a decrease in the number of users testing the unstable packages for us in precisely the configurations that are relevant to the XCB switch. On the other hand, delaying the upload means less testing time with other proprietary applications. For a start, it would probably make sense to file Priority: important bugs on sun-java5 and sun-java6 describing the breakage. Then wait a bit, and if upstream is too busy with other things like OpenJDK to address the issue, upload the XCB switch to unstable anyway. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 22:39:41 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: For a start, it would probably make sense to file Priority: important bugs on sun-java5 and sun-java6 describing the breakage. Then wait a bit, and if upstream is too busy with other things like OpenJDK to address the issue, upload the XCB switch to unstable anyway. #402165, #414535, http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6532373 Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Thursday 19 April 2007 03.15:21 David Nusinow wrote: We need to push XCB forward though, and how to deal with the java bug mentioned in that post isn't clear yet. What I don't quite understand is how a non-free package should block this upgrade. Yes, Java is used by a lot of people and I'd certainly not push this into testing until the problem is solved, but we're talking about unstable here. If Java is broken in unstable because of a Java bug (AFAIU this is really a Java bug, not an X bug?) and is not so easy to fix, the by all means lets break Java. Somebody apparently had pressure from somebody to push Java into non-free, so reports that Java is broken in Debian unstable should get the pressure up to get it fixed, no? cheers -- vbi -- what is the process? Do we vote, do we pray or do we send bribes? -- Ian Grigg, trying to get a new OpenPGP RFC out pgp7LU6mDFir0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 03:08:35PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: On Thursday 19 April 2007 03.15:21 David Nusinow wrote: We need to push XCB forward though, and how to deal with the java bug mentioned in that post isn't clear yet. What I don't quite understand is how a non-free package should block this upgrade. Yes, Java is used by a lot of people and I'd certainly not push this into testing until the problem is solved, but we're talking about unstable here. If Java is broken in unstable because of a Java bug (AFAIU this is really a Java bug, not an X bug?) and is not so easy to fix, the by all means lets break Java. Somebody apparently had pressure from somebody to push Java into non-free, so reports that Java is broken in Debian unstable should get the pressure up to get it fixed, no? unstable doesn't mean it's ok to upload packages with known bugs that render the system unusable to many users and drives them away from using unstable because they're using non-free software and that shouldn't matter to us. The consequences of breaking Java for most users (whether they're using it in the form packaged in non-free or not) would be an increased volume of (duplicate) bug reports for the XSF and, if the problem remains unresolved, a decrease in the number of users testing the unstable packages for us in precisely the configurations that are relevant to the XCB switch. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 09:15:21PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: Also of major note, Julien clarified my post a bit in the comments. Most of 7.2 is actually in unstable, including the drivers (in addition, we have pre-release drivers for intel in experimental). The missing thing though is the server (which is, of course, the centerpiece of the release), which will go in with the coming version 1.3 release, with or without XCB. We need to push XCB forward though, and how to deal with the java bug mentioned in that post isn't clear yet. I'm totally confused by this. I thought a way forward had been identified in our discussion on IRC, has something changed? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 04:13:35AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 09:15:21PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: Also of major note, Julien clarified my post a bit in the comments. Most of 7.2 is actually in unstable, including the drivers (in addition, we have pre-release drivers for intel in experimental). The missing thing though is the server (which is, of course, the centerpiece of the release), which will go in with the coming version 1.3 release, with or without XCB. We need to push XCB forward though, and how to deal with the java bug mentioned in that post isn't clear yet. I'm totally confused by this. I thought a way forward had been identified in our discussion on IRC, has something changed? It got more complicated after that. I uploaded the XCB NMU with the Novell patch to provide an environment variable that the user could set to allow the locking check to fail in XCB without terminating the program. The idea was then to patch our java package to allow java to run, but also for us to find and fix the bugs elsewhere. We really do want to catch those bugs now and I don't want to wait for Sun to get off their asses so that we can do it. Looking at the java package, it'd take a bit of complicated reworking to wrap the java binary in a script that sets the environment variable. Feasible, but a little invasive for a band-aid rather than a real fix, so I haven't done it yet. On top of that, Jaime and Josh (XCB guys, for those following along at home) were surprised that the java apps would work at all with XCB even with the lock check disabled. I haven't extensively tested java apps running with XCB yet to see if it'll work consistently. What I really would like to do is actually fix the bug in java though. We spent some time hunting down the java source and trying to figure out the problem. Apparently the java binaries that are distributed by Sun statically link old versions of the X libs that have locking bugs (now fixed) in them. Preloading the libs doesn't seem to work on the more recent versions of java though, so there may well be a bug in the code. I'm hoping to have some time to figure out where the bug is and fix it, but that's going to require figuring out a few basic things first. If anyone has any mysterious contacts at Sun that they could talk to about this, that'd be great. They've got the bug report in their database, and since the whole java-in-debian thing was a totally backroom affair, I have no idea who to contact about this to ask them to put some real effort in to it. - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:57:08PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: If anyone has any mysterious contacts at Sun that they could talk to about this, that'd be great. isn't there this new guy at Sun called 'ian murdoch' ;-) - -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/| | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org | |join the new debian-community.org to help Debian! | |___ Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed ___| -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGKAZ8v8UcC1qRZVMRAjl/AJ4obn/nB5tgA78jiFHe38Y8jY7E9wCfW9xP NBjK/s6w8dbFxgl922+wxJk= =GF5+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:57:08PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: If anyone has any mysterious contacts at Sun that they could talk to about this, that'd be great. They've got the bug report in their database, and since the whole java-in-debian thing was a totally backroom affair, I have no idea who to contact about this to ask them to put some real effort in to it. Best to contact Tom Marble (1). He is the openjdk ambassador and worked on the inclusion of SUN JDK in non-free. He will forward anything to the right people. Cheers, Michael 1) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. | Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : | Free Java Developer http://www.classpath.org `. `' | `-| 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 08:31:04AM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: Just a quick heads-up for those who don't read planet and have been wondering why Xorg 7.2 is lingering in experimental: There's an excellent announcement on David Nusinov's blog at http://gravityboy.livejournal.com/34738.html. I wish such stuff would be posted to the mailing lists and not just to blogs. Sorry I didn't post it to a mailing list. The stuff I blog isn't really approprite for -devel-announce, and I really want to make sure that our users know what's going on, so planet seems like the natural place. This is the second request though, so I'll try and send updates to -devel as well. Also of major note, Julien clarified my post a bit in the comments. Most of 7.2 is actually in unstable, including the drivers (in addition, we have pre-release drivers for intel in experimental). The missing thing though is the server (which is, of course, the centerpiece of the release), which will go in with the coming version 1.3 release, with or without XCB. We need to push XCB forward though, and how to deal with the java bug mentioned in that post isn't clear yet. To David and the other XSF people: keep on as you have the last years! X just is a non-issue, and that's just what I expect from it - it just works. (proprietary nvidia hardware excluded, but then that's my fault for having such hardware ...) Thank you, and I promise you we'll improve it. There's a few big changes on the way (randr 1.2) and a few small ones too. As for nvidia, we've got two volunteers to help maintain nouveau for us[0] so even that problem will lessen in the future. - David Nusinow [0] This is the sort of reason why Debian rocks, btw. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Xorg 7.2
Yo! Just a quick heads-up for those who don't read planet and have been wondering why Xorg 7.2 is lingering in experimental: There's an excellent announcement on David Nusinov's blog at http://gravityboy.livejournal.com/34738.html. I wish such stuff would be posted to the mailing lists and not just to blogs. To David and the other XSF people: keep on as you have the last years! X just is a non-issue, and that's just what I expect from it - it just works. (proprietary nvidia hardware excluded, but then that's my fault for having such hardware ...) cheers -- vbi -- featured product: the Apache web server - http://httpd.apache.org pgpHMBujzx2vN.pgp Description: PGP signature
