On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 00:04, Branden Robinson wrote:
> # There is no "cantfix" tag.
> tag 234556 = wontfix
> retitle 216933 libx11-6: many clients get BadLength error from
> X_ChangeProperty request [Transmeta Crusoe CMS bug]
> retitle 234556 libx11-6: apps crash with 'BadLength (poly request too
# There is no "cantfix" tag.
tag 234556 = wontfix
retitle 216933 libx11-6: many clients get BadLength error from X_ChangeProperty
request [Transmeta Crusoe CMS bug]
retitle 234556 libx11-6: apps crash with 'BadLength (poly request too large or
internal Xlib length error)' [Transmeta Crusoe CMS bu
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # There is no "cantfix" tag.
> tag 234556 = wontfix
Bug#234556: libx11-6: apps crash with 'BadLength (poly request too large or
internal Xlib length erro' [sic]
Tags were: help
Bug#216933: libx11-6: many clients get BadLength error from X_ChangePropert
On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 23:15, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> I notice there's been no follow-up to this bug since your message.
Yes, sorry for this. I totally forgot. Actually, I think we found a
workaround (see: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~fleury/bug_cms/).
It might means that we should close the bug.
>
On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 07:01:08PM +0200, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just in order to collect a bit more data on this case, I would like
> everybody that encounter this bug to give me their version of the CMS
> (Code Morphing Software) that they are using on their hardware.
I notice the
Hi all,
Just in order to collect a bit more data on this case, I would like
everybody that encounter this bug to give me their version of the CMS
(Code Morphing Software) that they are using on their hardware.
You can find this information at boot time (whatever OS you are using).
Mine is the fo
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 08:38:17AM +0200, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> I feel much more knowledgeable with my explanation than with this one.
> Moreover, I have some "evidences" that the CMS is involved (like the
> fact that running a copy of the Xserver is free of bug).
>
> The problem is now: What t
Well,
You were right, it seems that I'm far from being the first one to have
unveiled this bug: http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=455
It was in April.
After reading this, I checked my version of the CMS on my computer
(it is in the dmesg):
CPU: After generic identify, caps: 00808
On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 05:51, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> I'm impressed with the amount of energy you've put into tracking this
> bug, but you should have read history of the bugs merged with yours...
> Especially
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=216933&msg=63
I read this one. In a ma
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 10:47:06AM +0200, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just write here a quick update of the bug to tell you the state of the
> process.
(...)
I'm impressed with the amount of energy you've put into tracking this
bug, but you should have read history of the bugs merged with
Hi,
I just write here a quick update of the bug to tell you the state of the
process.
First, it is still not solved but I think I have located it...
(still there is room for uncertainty).
After posting the description of the bug on the Linux Kernel
Mailing-list I've been contacted by a guy from
11 matches
Mail list logo
