On Wednesday 02 Mar 2005 19:41, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 02.Mär 2005 - 19:40:29, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > > Xlib: unexpected async reply (sequence 0x7ada)!
> >
> > Since when does that happen? Did you change something except OOo? If
> > yes, what? May it be a xlib bug?
>
> Since this weekend I think. I wrote a document last week and it did
> not happen. This week oowriter crashes when I only start it and then
> look at my mails or something. nearly-daily updates of sid and yes
> there where other things changed. Luckily I collect the changelogs ;-)
>
> So here's the list:
>
> openoffice.org 1.1.3-5 on 19.Feb
> xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-12 on 20.Feb
> openoffice.org 1.1.3-6 on 21.Feb
> openoffice.ogr 1.1.3-7 on 26.Feb
> xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-12.0.1 on 26.Feb

Hmm, this thread started today on the upstream users list and talks about the 
same problem, but with 1.9:

http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=users&msgNo=86626

> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:20:20 +0200
> From: Rich
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-13; format=flowed
> Subject: [users] Xlib: unexpected async reply
> 
> 
> unfortunately i haven't found a reliable way to reproduce this problem. 
> usually it happens when i'm using generic widgets and several times 
> switch between oo.org windows - although that's not a requirement, last 
> time it hang when i had a single drawing open. i'll try do some more 
> testing, so far i've seen it approx 5 times. hopefully ;) it'll surface 
> again.
> 
> Philipp Lohmann - Sun Germany wrote:
> > This would be a severe problem within OOo. Can you describe a method to 
> > reproduce this problem ? If so, please file an issue.
> > 
> > Kind regards, pl
> > 
> > Rich wrote:
> > 
> >> lately 1.9 beta candidate hangs now and then with an error message (i 
> >> run it from console) :
> >> Xlib: unexpected async reply
> >>
> >> could this be a problem in oo.org (i found a message in a debian list 
> >> that mentioned similar problem with staroffice, but it was pretty old 
> >> - so 5.2) ?
> 

Reply via email to