-------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:59:51 +1000 > Von: "Edward O\'Callaghan" <victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com> > An: xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org > Betreff: [xwin-discuss] Intel 82945G/GZ
> Hi, > In regards to; > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=2842 > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=3582 > > I am sorry, but what does it take to get a bug fixed ? > I have provided ample amount of info on a *very* common chipset quite > some time ago. > The first report was filed way back in 2008-08-11. > > Without these fixed my Solaris desktop is next to useless ! > I sometimes have to wait for min for desktop items to start to respond > again and its nothing to do with XAA/EXA as far as I can see. I have > used tried Mesa 7.0.3 and the new Intel drivers to no effect. More > details in report. > I feel I have been fairly patient but things such as a newer version > of Pidgin or Gnome or whatever seems to keep getting higher priority > then bug reports such as the ones above. > > As both a user and a member of the community I would like to know why > Sun persistence in having a new version of Gnome as a higher priority > then a working X server and stable/workable drivers? > > Thanks, > Edward O'Callaghan. > > -- > All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for > electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, > presentations and word processing documents from this email address. > The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to > read international standards and who use proprietary products such as > MS Office. > See: http://www.openoffice.org/ > Edward O'Callaghan. > edwardoc_AT_BlastWave_(.)_Org > -- > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan > http://moonshine.opn4.org/ > http://www.pcbsd.org/ Edward, Sun's today's X11 group (or maybe some i86pc unit) cannot test each and every Xorg driver on each and every potential config of hardware. And I wouldn't expect such a bug to be fixed withing 6 weeks (1st bug) or less than 1 week (2nd bug). I recommend that you ask the author(s) and maintainer(s) of the {intel} driver on the xorg-devel-list. Or maybe that you send your exact machine (the whole thing) to the X11-group, because in some cases your actual pieces of hw may differ slightly from 95% of the other items that made it to customers under the very same brands. Maybe it has to do with you gxf chipset's firmware rev. Or with you mobo's Bios. Or even that a small chip or even only some registers of it got destroyed, for example through ESD. Bug#0 2008-08-11 08:44:59 : # Four Sun-engineers and one from Intel have been assigned to this bug. One of them has taken the time to reproduce your bug on similar (maybe not identical!) hw. But he failed to reproduce it: Comment #6 From Liang Kan 2008-09-24 20:48:29 ------- I borrow a 945G (pci id: 0x2772) machine and try to reproduce this bug, but failed. I use the default config file and the highest resolutions can be 1680x1050. I also try 1024x768. All works well. I run compiz too. I used b97. My monitor is Dell E228WFP. Bug#1 2008-09-24 14:04:39: This one is less than a week old. >From your log files it looks strange, like either your card is defective or >there is indeed a bug in the intel driver {whatever odd decision-making that >might be responsible for generating those complaints: (vrefresh out of range) and (width too large for virtual size)} One defective register of your card could be responsible for this, or one single byte in one of the driver's source files. In this case it appears unlikely that code outside the intel driver is the reason, although you cannot even totally exclude that. Be aware that the move to libpciaccess was a bold one, all (modern) drivers needed to be ported by xorg-devel. Nobody can test all drivers in all potentially supported hw configs with all Bios versions and firmware versions combined in all permutations. In this special case I do not see a reason for a loud complaint, because specificly here I don't see a clear "guilt" on ".com" 's or x.org's side. Regards, Martin
