| [10:39] <tjaalton> whee, got my hardy t-shirt | |
| [10:39] <tjaalton> and other merchandise | |
| [10:39] <tjaalton> too bad that both coffee cups were broken | |
| [10:39] <tjaalton> damn UPS :) | |
| [10:51] <tseliot> tjaalton: no coffee then :-P | |
| [10:52] <tjaalton> right, tea is better :) | |
| [11:13] <tjaalton> bryce: btw, should you drop gutsy from the versions_current.html page, and add intrepid? maybe even put intrepid in the middle to minimize the need to scroll :) | |
| [14:12] <komputes> If someone has some spare time, I would like some assistance in setting up a USB to VGA adepter which I can't get to work. | |
| [14:13] <tjaalton> sorry, I need to finally fix lrm/nvidia | |
| [14:33] <tjaalton> tseliot: I'm about to fix nvidia diverting/symlinking libwfb, which should fix at least bugs like "pink shadows with compiz" and "FF crashes on certain sites" :P | |
| [14:34] <tseliot> tjaalton: what was causing the problem? | |
| [14:35] <tjaalton> it should use the libwfb.so provided by the server | |
| [14:35] <tjaalton> and not divert it and symlink against the nvidia one | |
| [14:35] <tjaalton> "In practice, I don't think that was communicated clearly enough to the distributions" | |
| [14:35] <tjaalton> said aaronp | |
| [14:36] <tseliot> since my packages are a customised version of the lrm they are affected by this problem. I'll have a look at the packaging scripts | |
| [14:37] <tjaalton> I changed preinst to remove the divert instead of adding one, and rules no longer symlinks that | |
| [14:37] <tjaalton> should be enough | |
| [14:40] <tseliot> tjaalton: this line, right? dpkg-divert --add --rename --package nvidia-glx@@NV_LEGACY@@-envy --divert /usr/lib/nvidia/libwfb.so.xserver-xorg-core /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so > /dev/null | |
| [14:40] <tjaalton> yes | |
| [14:41] <tjaalton> I'll put a debdiff somewhere soonish, so you can review it and grab what you need | |
| [14:41] <tjaalton> there's also bug 118605 which is simple | |
| [14:41] <tjaalton> to fix | |
| [14:41] <tjaalton> ah, no ubotu | |
| [14:43] <tseliot> yes, I would like to read the debdiff | |
| [14:44] <tseliot> tjaalton: in the rules we should install the wfb without making the symlink, right? | |
| [14:45] <tjaalton> tseliot: well, I changed the symlink libwfb.so -> libnvidia-wfb.so.1, like the installer apparently does | |
| [14:46] <tseliot> tjaalton: maybe I should file a bugreport against my packages too: | |
| [14:46] <tseliot> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-restricted-modules-envy-2.6.24 | |
| [14:48] <komputes> can someone please take a look at this 6 day bug: 224479 | |
| [14:49] <tjaalton> or just link to them, bugs 212648 and 186382 | |
| [14:49] <tjaalton> we need ubotu here | |
| [14:50] <tseliot> tjaalton: my source code is a bit different | |
| [14:51] <tjaalton> but you have the same bugs, no? | |
| [14:52] <tseliot> only this bug AFAIK | |
| [14:53] <tjaalton> the atieventsd.sh from fglrx is buggy, so 118605 affects you too | |
| [14:53] <tjaalton> uh, authatieventsd.sh | |
| [14:56] <tseliot> :-/ is this the patch which you included? | |
| [14:56] <tseliot> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/12737164/authatieventsd.patch | |
| [14:56] <tjaalton> yes | |
| [14:57] <tseliot> my packages were introduced yesterday and I already have 2 bugs to fix ;) | |
| [14:57] <tjaalton> there are also a number of upgrade bugs from gutsy | |
| [14:58] <tjaalton> against xorg | |
| [14:58] <tjaalton> I mean filed against xorg currently | |
| [14:58] <tseliot> how can I help? | |
| [15:00] <tjaalton> search them and file against the correct package :) | |
| [15:00] <tjaalton> I'm not sure if there's anything to fix though, unless you want to update the old packages | |
| [15:01] <tseliot> ok | |
| [15:01] <tseliot> let me know when the debdiff is ready | |
| [15:01] <tseliot> please ;) | |
| [15:02] <tjaalton> sure, I need to test it first | |
| [15:17] <tseliot> komputes: I replied to the bugreport | |
| [15:18] <komputes> tseliot: thanks | |
| [15:43] <tjaalton> tseliot: http://users.tkk.fi/~tjaalton/dpkg/lrm-diff | |
| [15:43] <tjaalton> not tested yet though | |
| [15:44] <tseliot> I'll have a look at it. Thanks :-) | |
| === ubottu changed the topic of #ubuntu-x to: 06 May 21:00 UTC: Community Council | 07 May 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 08 May 13:00 UTC: Desktop Team | 09 May 04:00 UTC: MOTU | 14 May 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 15 May 13:00 UTC: Desktop Team | |
| [16:16] <tjaalton> damn bot :) | |
| [16:18] <tseliot> tjaalton: I think it would be wise to remove the reference to the wfb in the postrm.in too even though the script looks for the diversion | |
| [16:18] <tseliot> and there's another thing | |
| [16:18] <tjaalton> why? | |
| [16:18] <tjaalton> better keep it there for awhile | |
| [16:19] <tseliot> if we don't divert the wfb why should we try to remove it? Anyway this won't break anything | |
| [16:19] <tseliot> there's another potential problem | |
| [16:20] <tseliot> in the preinst.in | |
| === tjaalton changed the topic of #ubuntu-x to: Ubuntu 8.04 released! | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X | |
| [16:22] <tseliot> let me put a few things on pastebin | |
| === ubottu changed the topic of #ubuntu-x to: 06 May 21:00 UTC: Community Council | 07 May 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 08 May 13:00 UTC: Desktop Team | 09 May 04:00 UTC: MOTU | 14 May 21:00 UTC: Server Team | 15 May 13:00 UTC: Desktop Team | |
| [16:24] <tseliot> tjaalton: http://pastebin.com/mee4a53f | |
| [16:24] <tseliot> for example, have a look at line 63 | |
| [16:25] <tseliot> I check and remove diversions created by both me packages and the standard lrm | |
| [16:25] <tjaalton> those are legacy | |
| === tjaalton changed the topic of #ubuntu-x to: Ubuntu 8.04 released! | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X | |
| [16:27] <tseliot> have a look at line 121 etc. | |
| [16:27] <tjaalton> yes? | |
| [16:27] <tseliot> my packages remove those diversions when you uninstall them | |
| [16:28] <tseliot> maybe you could do the same with the original lrm | |
| [16:28] <tseliot> just in case my diversions are not removed | |
| [16:28] <tjaalton> sorry, I don't understand | |
| [16:28] <tjaalton> those are removed by lrm too | |
| [16:28] <tseliot> ok, an example: | |
| [16:29] <tseliot> if nvidia-glx-envy creates a diversion | |
| [16:29] <tseliot> and for some weird reason this is not removed | |
| [16:29] <tseliot> your preinst will look for diversions made by nvidia-glx with grep | |
| [16:30] <tseliot> and will catch the diversions made by nvidia-glx-envy too | |
| [16:30] <tseliot> right? | |
| [16:30] <tjaalton> I bet you don't divert /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1? | |
| [16:30] <tseliot> but will try to remove only the diversions made by nvidia-glx | |
| [16:31] <tseliot> dpkg-divert --add --rename --package nvidia-glx@@NV_LEGACY@@-envy --divert /usr/lib/nvidia/libGL.so.1.xlibmesa /usr/lib/libGL.so.1 > /dev/null | |
| [16:32] <tjaalton> and the grep doesn't match that | |
| [16:33] <tseliot> doesn't match what? | |
| [16:33] <tjaalton> line 63 | |
| [16:34] <tjaalton> doesn't match that file | |
| [16:34] <tjaalton> er, diversion | |
| [16:35] <tjaalton> I still fail to see the problem :) | |
| [16:35] <tseliot> yes, I know. It was just an example | |
| [16:36] <tseliot> I just want to make sure that the lrm and lrm-envy can coexist | |
| [16:36] <tseliot> which they do, at least here | |
| [16:36] <tjaalton> maybe the lrm versions should be dropped | |
| [16:37] <tjaalton> no point in duplicating all this hackery | |
| [16:37] <tseliot> this will be solved in Intrepid | |
| [16:37] <tseliot> I need the lrm-envy to work with DKMS | |
| [16:38] <tseliot> which is something I can't do with lrm on a stable release | |
| [16:38] <tseliot> right? | |
| [16:38] <tjaalton> right | |
| [16:38] <tseliot> when the users upgrade to Intrepid | |
| [16:39] <tseliot> if they use the lrm-envy, those packages will be replaced by the lrm | |
| [16:39] <tseliot> which (hopefully) we'll improve at the UDS | |
| [16:40] <tseliot> I'm not a big fan of duplication of efforts, really | |
| [16:41] <tjaalton> good | |
| [16:41] <tjaalton> :) | |
| [16:44] <tseliot> tjaalton: BTW this is the preinst.in which I use for my packages: http://www.albertomilone.com/nvidia-glx-envy.preinst.in | |
| [16:46] <tjaalton> pretty much identical to the one in lrm | |
| [16:46] <tseliot> yes, exactly, I can keep it that way | |
| [16:49] <tseliot> tjaalton: your patch looks good. I'll test it. | |
| [16:52] <munckfish> tjaalton: I submitted a couple of small PS3 related patches for dexconf in xorg to the ubuntu-x mailing list over the week end. Are they ok for inclusion? | |
| [16:54] <tjaalton> munckfish: the updated fb check looks fine, but I'm not sure about the other one. there should be a fix for the server somewhere | |
| [16:54] <tjaalton> although it's simple | |
| [16:56] <munckfish> tjaalton: sure fine. Lets leave the second one for now then. | |
| [17:26] <tseliot> tjaalton: a small fix to the patch for fglrx | |
| [17:27] <tseliot> the first 2 lines of that patch should be: | |
| [17:27] <tseliot> --- common/etc/ati/authatieventsd.sh 2008-03-19 10:56:01.568196236 +0100 | |
| [17:27] <tseliot> +++ common/etc/ati/authatieventsd.sh 2008-03-19 11:04:31.272102426 +0100 | |
| [17:27] <tseliot> otherwise it won't find the file | |
| [17:27] <tjaalton> fixed in the debdiff | |
| [17:28] <tseliot> ok, perfect | |
| [17:28] <tseliot> I'm building the packages right now | |
| [17:30] <tjaalton> mine are almost done | |
| [17:33] <tseliot> mine are done. I'll test them on my ATI card on my testing box | |
| [17:33] <tjaalton> you have KDM? | |
| [17:33] <tseliot> no, but I can install it | |
| [17:34] <tseliot> shall I install KDM and use it | |
| [17:34] <tseliot> ? | |
| [17:34] <tjaalton> that's the way to trigger the bug | |
| [17:34] <tjaalton> and test that the fix works | |
| [17:34] <tjaalton> but it should be tested | |
| [17:34] <tseliot> ok, I'll do it | |
| [17:34] <tseliot> yes, of course | |
| [17:35] <tseliot> this is why we have -proposed | |
| [17:35] <tjaalton> ok, the libwfb.so symlink needs to be removed in preinst | |
| [17:35] <tjaalton> dpkg-divert: rename involves overwriting `/usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so' with different file `/usr/lib/nvidia/libwfb.so.xserver-xorg-core', not allowed | |
| [17:36] <tseliot> ouch | |
| [17:37] <tseliot> shall we test its existence with [ -h /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so ] ? | |
| [17:37] <tseliot> and remove it? | |
| [17:38] <tseliot> or is it always a symlink? | |
| [17:38] <tjaalton> probably | |
| [17:38] <tjaalton> no | |
| [17:38] <tseliot> ok then we can check that it's a symlink and then remove it | |
| [17:39] <tjaalton> yeah, shadows work | |
| [17:41] <tseliot> something like this? | |
| [17:41] <tseliot> if [ -h /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so ]; then | |
| [17:41] <tseliot> rm -f /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so | |
| [17:41] <tseliot> fi | |
| [17:41] <tseliot> but better indented :-P | |
| [17:42] <tseliot> I know, the -f is useless | |
| [17:42] <tjaalton> that should work | |
| [17:43] <tseliot> I'll put it before the if [ "$(dpkg-divert --list /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so | awk '{ print $7 }')" = "nvidia-glx@@NV_LEGACY@@" ] | |
| [17:44] <tseliot> since I will have to remove also the diversion created by my current lrm-envy | |
| [17:47] <tseliot> I'm building the packages again | |
| [17:51] <tjaalton> I'm wondering if the error message means something else.. | |
| [17:52] <tseliot> which error? | |
| [17:52] <tjaalton> dpkg-divet | |
| [17:52] <tjaalton> rt | |
| [17:52] <tseliot> do you still get that error despite my suggestion? | |
| [17:53] <tjaalton> I haven't tried, it takes a while to build | |
| [17:57] <tjaalton> maybe the error is just misleading, I'll build the new package now | |
| [18:00] <tseliot> I'll test it here too | |
| [18:16] <tjaalton> works! | |
| [18:16] <tjaalton> phew | |
| [18:19] <tjaalton> er, no | |
| [18:20] <tjaalton> can't find libwfb.so :) | |
| [18:21] <tjaalton> dpkg-divert --remove didn't move the library back in place | |
| [18:21] <tjaalton> probably since the symlink was removed, hrmh | |
| [18:23] <tjaalton> -> | |
| [18:23] <tseliot> mmm... | |
| [18:29] <tseliot> tjaalton: shall we add this line: cp -f /usr/lib/nvidia/libwfb.so.xserver-xorg-core /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so | |
| [18:29] <tseliot> and remove this one? | |
| [18:29] <tseliot> rm -f /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libwfb.so | |
| [18:30] <tseliot> so that both files are available (and are identical but with different names) | |
| [18:30] <tseliot> and that the diversion will be removed | |
| [18:31] <tseliot> but of course we should do something like if [ -f /usr/lib/nvidia/libwfb.so.xserver-xorg-core ]; then | |
| [18:52] <tseliot> tjaalton: damn, the fglrx driver locked up when I logged out with KDM (despite the patch) | |
| [18:53] <tseliot> I'll have a look at the log | |
| [19:08] <tseliot> tjaalton: nothing interesting in the log. Sigh. I have asked ATI's mailing list for news on this bug | |
| [19:08] <tseliot> that patch doesn't work for me :-( | |
| [19:35] <tjaalton> I think the better solution would be to remove the diversion in postinst, then the old libwfb.so link should be out of the way anyway | |
| [19:35] <tjaalton> ie. removed with the old package | |
| [19:35] <tjaalton> I'll test that tomorrow | |
| [19:42] <tseliot> tjaalton: ok, I'll let you know if ATI's staff knows the solution to the other problem | |
| [19:53] <bryce> tjaalton: ok I'll fix up versions_current and status_current today-ish | |
| [20:17] <tjaalton> bryce: ok cool | |
| [20:23] <bryce> tjaalton: I also went through and unsubbed us from all the obsolete packages (xserver-xorg-driver-*, etc.) so the page will be more concise | |
| [20:30] <tjaalton> bryce: ooh, nice | |
| [20:31] <bryce> http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Xorg/versions_current.html has intrepid on it now (but blank) | |
| [20:32] <bryce> http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Xorg/status_current.html is intrepified | |
| [20:36] <bryce> tjaalton: btw, I'm probably going to go through and WONTFIX a ton of displayconfig-gtk bugs within the next week or so. I've prepared a page explaining the situation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/DisplayConfigGtk | |
| [20:37] <bryce> also, I've been thinking about the older lrm packages and their bugs. I'm thinking there's a vanishingly small chance we'd actually fix any pre-hardy lrm issues, so am thinking we should go through and wontfix them or move them to 2.6.24 if they still look valid issues in hardy | |
| [20:38] <bryce> then once the older lrm packages are cleared of X bugs, we could unsub x-swat from those packages, and not have all the non-x bugs in them counting against us | |
| [20:38] <bryce> but what do you think? | |
| [21:03] <tseliot> tjaalton: why do we have to remove the diversion in the preinst when such diversion is already removed in the postrm? | |
| [21:04] <tseliot> when, say, nvidia-glx is removed that diversion is removed too. Therefore we only have to make sure that the new nvidia-glx doesn't create that diversion any longer. | |
| [21:06] * tseliot knows that he won't sleep because of this problem :-P | |
| [21:12] <bryce> tseliot: :-) (been there) | |
| [21:19] <ted1> Okay, so X crashed on me twice. But, now I can't recreate it. | |
| [21:19] <ted1> Is it worth filing a bug, or is that just going to be a waste of everyone's time? | |
| [21:20] <bryce> if you have a backtrace of the crash, it can be investigated | |
| [21:20] <ted1> I have the backtrace from the Xorg.0.log, does that count? | |
| [21:22] <bryce> yep, that's good | |
| [21:23] <bryce> often those backtraces aren't detailed enough, but sometimes they're enough to identify if the bug is a dupe of another bug or something | |
| [21:23] <seb128> ted1: you should enable apport if you are still running hardy | |
| [21:24] <ted1> Does it get disabled? | |
| [21:24] <ted1> I didn't think it got ever turned off, but I was figuring that X would be too low level for it. | |
| [21:29] <seb128> ted1: it's disable in stable to not annoy users | |
| [21:30] <seb128> ted1: you need to edit /etc/defaults/apport to enable it | |
| [21:32] <tjaalton> tseliot: because we want that diversion to disappear on upgrade | |
| [21:33] <tjaalton> and I said postinst, preinst apparently is not the place to do it | |
| [21:33] <ted1> seb128: I didn't know that, thanks. It is on now. | |
| [21:34] <tjaalton> bryce: yes, I've been thinking of doing the same (closing pre 2.6.24 lrm bugs) | |
| [21:35] <tjaalton> then when fglrx/nvidia is ripped from lrm we would have much more chance of actually knowing what are the important issues, now they are only buried in the noise | |
| [21:38] <tjaalton> fedora also includes debugging symbols during development phase (or at least they used to do that). don't know how feasible that would be.. | |
| [21:39] <tjaalton> (re: apport, stable release) | |
| [21:42] * bryce nods | |
| [21:44] <seb128> tjaalton: you mean they don't strip unstable builds? | |
| [21:44] <tjaalton> seb128: I'm not sure how it's done, I'll just ask :) | |
| [21:45] <seb128> that would not be possible in ubuntu | |
| [21:45] <tjaalton> it would mean rebuilding the whole archive before release, right? | |
| [21:45] <seb128> having ubuntu fitting on one cd is already a fight most of the time | |
| [21:45] <tjaalton> oh right | |
| [21:45] <seb128> and that too | |
| [21:46] <seb128> apport and the retracers usually work alright | |
| [21:48] <tjaalton> the tough cases will always be painful to debug | |
| [21:48] <tjaalton> I guess no tools help there | |
| [21:48] <seb128> right, tools don't do everything for you | |
| [21:52] <bryce> tjaalton: do you know if there's a way we could configure X to print out full backtraces in Xorg.0.log instead of the reduced backtraces? | |
| [21:57] <tjaalton> bryce: I wonder what --enable-debug does | |
| [21:58] <bryce> tjaalton: any ideas on this apt-get update error - http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/10611/ ? | |
| [21:58] <bryce> "Hash Sum mismatch" | |
| [21:59] <tjaalton> ah | |
| [21:59] <tseliot> bryce: -logverbose 5 perhaps? | |
| [21:59] <tjaalton> bryce: a busy mirror I guess | |
| [21:59] <tjaalton> our mirror got hosed because it used to mirror a.u.c | |
| [21:59] <ted1> bryce: I'm getting crummy access to the US mirror right now. It keeps jumping IPs. | |
| [21:59] <bryce> ah, hmm, so would switching to a different mirror do it? | |
| [22:00] <tjaalton> I switched apt-mirror to use se.a.u.c, works nicely | |
| [22:00] <tjaalton> and current too | |
| [22:00] <bryce> ok | |
| [22:01] <bryce> ahh much better | |
| [22:05] <bryce> yay - intrepified: http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Xorg/versions_current.html | |
| [22:05] <bryce> lunch. bbiab | |
| [22:08] <tjaalton> sweet, a dynamic page :) | |
| [22:35] <tjaalton> great, mesa-7.1 coming soon | |
| [22:35] <tjaalton> maybe by UDS | |
| [22:35] <bryce> sweet | |
| [23:03] * bryce fusses with css | |
| [23:24] <bryce> ok, this looks fairly good... http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Xorg/versions_current.html | |
| [23:25] <tjaalton> cool, you dropped all the apps that are in bundles | |
| [23:25] <bryce> yup | |