On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 19:47:11 +0100, Ruediger Oertel wrote:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0055fe4f in DeliverPropertyEvent (pWin=0x4545454545454545,
value=0x7fffdf00) at rrproperty.c:34
34 rrproperty.c: No such file or directory.
in
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 17:20:24 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:05:27AM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
2. Make the handling of missing sections from an existing
configuration behave more like the full
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Ruediger Oertel r...@suse.de wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 17:20:24 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:05:27AM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
2. Make the handling of missing
On Thursday 25 March 2010 19:29:37 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Ruediger Oertel r...@suse.de wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 17:20:24 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:05:27AM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Ruediger Oertel r...@suse.de wrote:
On Thursday 25 March 2010 19:29:37 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Ruediger Oertel r...@suse.de wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 17:20:24 Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:05:27AM
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Ruediger Oertel wrote:
Do you have any backtrace information?
sure ...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0055fe4f in DeliverPropertyEvent (pWin=0x4545454545454545,
value=0x7fffdf00) at rrproperty.c:34
34 rrproperty.c: No such file or
On Thursday 25 March 2010 20:45:27 Timo Aaltonen wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Ruediger Oertel wrote:
Do you have any backtrace information?
sure ...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0055fe4f in DeliverPropertyEvent (pWin=0x4545454545454545,
On Thursday 25 March 2010 20:16:01 Dan Nicholson wrote:
Was it doing this before with your first patch?
yes, it's reproducable with older versions of the patch as well ...
Is this just the normal case where you have no ServerLayout/Screen in
the conf file, or something more special
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Timo Aaltonen wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Ruediger Oertel wrote:
On Thursday 25 March 2010 20:45:27 Timo Aaltonen wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Ruediger Oertel wrote:
Do you have any backtrace information?
sure ...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
On Friday 26 March 2010 00:22:00 Ruediger Oertel wrote:
On Thursday 25 March 2010 22:55:13 Timo Aaltonen wrote:
yes, for some reason it does not happen with the intel driver (or
probably other combinations with only one native driver plus fbdev and
vesa). Maybe that's a way to look:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Ruediger Oertel r...@suse.de wrote:
On Friday 26 March 2010 00:22:00 Ruediger Oertel wrote:
On Thursday 25 March 2010 22:55:13 Timo Aaltonen wrote:
yes, for some reason it does not happen with the intel driver (or
probably other combinations with only one
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:05:27AM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
2. Make the handling of missing sections from an existing
configuration behave more like the full autoconfig. In other words, if
there's a missing Screen section,
I'll try and look at the patch more carefully in a few days, but:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:20:24 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
+ if (!cptr)
+ return NULL;
+ memcpy(cptr, ptr, sizeof(GDevRec));
+ cptr-identifier =
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
2. Make the handling of missing sections from an existing
configuration behave more like the full autoconfig. In other words, if
there's a missing Screen section, generate multiple
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
2. Make the handling of missing sections from an existing
configuration behave more like the full autoconfig. In other words, if
there's a missing Screen section, generate multiple Screen/Device
pairs with fallbacks. I think this
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:45:26PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
According to the published schedule, we're supposed to be closing in on
the release within the next couple of weeks. I'm pretty satisfied with
the current state of the code, but I'd love to hear about regressions
that people are
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Stefan Dirsch sndir...@suse.de wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:45:26PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
According to the published schedule, we're supposed to be closing in on
the release within the next couple of weeks. I'm pretty satisfied with
the current
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Stefan Dirsch sndir...@suse.de wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:56:03AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Stefan Dirsch sndir...@suse.de wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:45:26PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
According to the
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Dan Nicholson dbn.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Stefan Dirsch sndir...@suse.de wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:56:03AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Stefan Dirsch sndir...@suse.de wrote:
On Sun, Mar
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:59:18AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
No, once you have an empty xorg.conf you're lost, an empty xorg.conf.d
directory is still ok though.
That makes sense. There are two ways to handle this.
1. Make the full autoconfig kick in when only xorg.conf is missing. I
20 matches
Mail list logo
