Re: Xorg 7.2

[Julien Cristau]

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

[Florian Weimer]

* 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

[Steve Langasek]

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

[Adrian von Bidder]

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

[Michael Koch]

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 
`. `'   |
  `-| 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

[Kevin Mark]

-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

[David Nusinow]

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

[Steve Langasek]

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

[David Nusinow]

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

[Adrian von Bidder]

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