On Jan 6, 2023, at 1:50 AM, Bastian Germann wrote:
>
> But there is a version available at
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/ocr-a-font/ that might be free.
> You can certainly replace it.
This one seems better than that one: https://tsukurimashou.osdn.jp/ocr.php.en
Annoyingly, the name
Correction, Gallant is in fact BSD licensed:
http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-current/src/sys/dev/wsfont/gallant12x22.h
False.
Luxi Mono is from Red Hat, I'm sure you've heard of them.
OCRA is an ANSI Standard, and is public domain.
Gallant is a reproduction of the Sun font created by Joshua M. Clulow and
released, as far as I am aware, into the public domain.
As I said, it's already fixed in 6.00. The fix is just to configure without
setcap and use setuid instead, which works properly with Mesa.
I assume that having 6.00 distributed by Debian prior to 2035 would be asking
too much, but we dare to dream.
Already fixed in XScreenSaver 6.00.
The bug is in Mesa: it has a panoply of env vars that do what LD_PRELOAD does,
except Mesa only checks geteuid instead of checking getauxval AT_SECURE, as the
kernel does. So anything that uses both Mesa and setcap is vulnerable.
Ironically, using setuid
.0 3748 664 pts/0S+ 21:56 0:00 grep saver
Note that pid 11997 does not have -nosplash on its command line.
--
Jamie Zawinski https://www.jwz.org/ https://www.dnalounge.com/
nd user B.
If things have gone wrong in a weird way, the "xscreensaver-systemd" process of
user A might linger, but it won't be able to communicate with user B's
xscreensaver.
--
Jamie Zawinski https://www.jwz.org/ https://www.dnalounge.com/
dministrator installed xscreensaver on a multi-user
system, the expectation would be for it to run in all graphical login sessions.
--
Jamie Zawinski https://www.jwz.org/ https://www.dnalounge.com/
> In xscreensaver (or maybe lightdm).
> Why is xscreensaver started in the lightdm session anyway?
> Is xscreensaver really usable as a per user service or should it be per
> session?
> Why is the lightdm xscreensaver instance interfering with the xscreensaver
> instance of the logged in user?
>
For best logging: xscreensaver -verbose -log log.txt
As far as I know, an XIO error means the X server dropped the connection to the
xscreensaver client. So either the X server itself crashed, or it decided to
disconnect xscreensaver for some unknown reason.
If the client had done something wrong, X11-protocol-wise, this would have been
a more
Oh FFS, the pedantry of you people knows no bounds. It's not even a *real
emulator*.
Did you even try emailing him?
--
Jamie Zawinski https://www.jwz.org/ https://www.dnalounge.com/
Well, on every system I've ever had access to, intltool rarely works, so I took
to just ignoring it entirely. YMMV.
It's all fair use, and you're a pinhead.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Driver bug, not xscreensaver.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Yves Lambert wrote:
It looks like when xscreensaver child dies, xscreensaver does not
launch another child and the keyboard is locked, only magic keys still
works, no way to switch to another VT.
This statement makes no sense to me at all.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
That's a new one... Yes, -sync will probably help, as will a core file stack
trace. I suspect we will discover that some sub-process launched by your PAM
stack is crashing and taking libpam with it. That line about an unknown process
dying means that we got a SIGCHLD for a pid that
If the problem here is that you launched xscreensaver-demo while
gnome-screensaver was running but xscreensaver was not, then you should have
gotten a dialog box saying exactly that, and offering to shut down
gnome-screensaver, instead of simply saying that xscreensaver was not running.
See
crashes (obviously!)
- There is ever a situation where a screen is not
completely covered by the xscreensaver windows.
(Unless two screens are configured to overlap).
Thanks!
--
Jamie Zawinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jwz.org/
[EMAIL
a new computer just for this.
--
Jamie Zawinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jwz.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dnalounge.com/
http://jwz.livejournal.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
Did you test what happens if nscreens remains 0 for some length of
time, e.g., through another idle cycle? I'm guessing the answer is
nothing good...
It's hard to tell just by looking at it, but I suspect that, for
example, with that change it's going to be running hacks on screens
that
I think this is fixed by the patch in bug 473681?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:19 AM, Tormod Volden wrote:
Believe me, the reason for the package split is exactly to make things
easier for third-party screensaver infrastructures (like
gnome-screensaver and kscreensaver), so that they can use xscreensaver
hacks without the user having xscreensaver
Obviously, fireworkx should not be showing a transparent background.
Equally obviously, this is not a bug in xscreensaver. It's a bug in
the X server, or in some lower layer like the video driver. You
should reassign this.
Is fireworkx the only OpenGL saver that provokes this bug?
--
On Nov 5, 2007, at 4:11 PM, Steffen Joeris wrote:
With this patch, xscreensaver fails to build:
Sorry, typo: pw-prompt_screen should have been pw-prompt_screen-
screen. Revised patch:
diff -u -r1.85 lock.c
--- lock.c 10 Jul 2007 20:27:24 - 1.85
+++ lock.c 1 Nov 2007
I don't understand how xscreensaver-gl-helper not being installed
could cause this sort of thing. However, this does sound vaguely
like another bug: can one of you who is able to reproduce the problem
try this patch and let me know if it works?
Thanks...
diff -u -r1.85 lock.c
--- lock.c
That patch is already included in 5.03. But you people are still
shipping 4.24, which is nearly eighteen months old. I really wish
you'd upgrade already.
Also, it is damned near impossible to exploit that. For it to be a
problem, the attacker needs to have already compromised either the
27 matches
Mail list logo
