[09:24] Erm... I get a white screen when I log into GNOME in Intrepid. What am I doing wrong? [09:24] GDM looks fine. [09:25] disable compiz [09:25] it's broken on intel [09:25] :( [09:25] 965 at least [09:25] Ok. [09:25] Thanks. [09:25] This will be fixed at some point, I presume? [09:25] * soren kinds of likes compiz. [09:26] there are two bugs and they were marked as blockers for mesa 7.1 yesterday, so yes they'll get fixed soon :) [09:26] Fantastic. Thanks. [09:26] * soren hugs tjaalton [09:26] the white screen one already has a fix, but then you'd end up with a black screen with some corrupt graphics :) [09:26] * tjaalton hugs soren back [09:28] * soren ponders the semantics of "fix" :) [09:29] ok, patch :) [09:29] two, actually [09:36] tjaalton: I heard back from Intel on this [09:36] Yong: [09:36] I just reproduced #14441 on 965G with tip of xserver1.5, mesa, drm, xf86-video-intel. A quick way to resolve it is commenting out [09:36] if (pI830->useEXA) [09:36] pDRIInfo->texOffsetStart = I830TexOffsetStart; [09:36] in xf86-video-intel/src/i830_dri.c. Then compiz works. You can ask Ubuntu guys for more test. [09:36] For #15477, It doesn't happen on G965. We may need to find a 945 box to look at it. [09:37] - Peng [09:37] night. [09:37] commenting that out breaks other setups [09:37] the workaround is already mentioned on the bug [09:39] 15477 does happen on 965 [09:39] but for that bug there already are patches [09:41] oh, night :) [14:10] heh [14:10] i filled up my / partition [14:10] oops [14:10] fun finding random crap on cleanup [14:10] XFree86.0.log === Q-FUN1 is now known as Q-FUNK === Q-FUN1 is now known as Q-FUNK === Q-FUN1 is now known as Q-FUNK === Q-FUN1 is now known as Q-FUNK [19:58] now, let's clear all l-r-m* from nvidia/fglrx bugs and let tseliot and superm1 have some fun :P [20:02] a great way to boost my lp karma [20:03] man, if you just mark them all invalid [20:04] you will earn a new top score on the "people pwnguin is angry at" table [20:05] hah [20:05] pvalli does that and it ticks me off [20:05] i just love getting told my bug is a dupe, but if i want to know WHICH one, i should just go look it up myself [20:09] tjaalton: I'll have a lot of fun then ;) [20:10] btw [20:10] this might be a good time to point out that there is an upstream bug tracker email address [20:10] and that launchpad apparently supports this [20:12] pwnguin: what benefit does it give? [20:12] a feeling that at least we tried? [20:13] plus, if we used it there might be an incentive to use something smarter on their end [20:13] ok, so does bugzilla have such a feature (email)? [20:13] I dont understand the motivation of the question [20:14] upstreams tend to use bugzilla [20:14] nvidia is upstream [20:14] so where to send the bug [20:14] ah [20:14] you've got this backwards i think [20:14] yeah, but they want that people run their script [20:14] hehe [20:14] LP does have an email, but that wasnt the point [20:15] tjaalton: the installer script or some crazy bug report script? [20:15] some crazy .. [20:15] fun [20:15] nvidia-bug-report.sh [20:18] tseliot: yes, you'll have a party of the century ;) [20:18] it never ends [20:36] tjaalton: does the patch on 15477 look ok for inclusion in our packages? [20:37] (good morning btw!) [20:40] bryce: morning bryce! yes, it does, but it's pointless without a fix for 14441 :) [20:44] bryce: you're going on a vacation soon, right? May I ask how long it will last? (so that I know when I can bug you again about phase 1) [20:46] tjaalton: ok, I highlighted the 14441 issues back to them [20:46] tseliot: next week will be the distro sprint in London, then I'll be on vacation the week after that [20:47] ok, thanks [20:47] I can't promise I'll get anything useful done during the sprint; most of the time is meetings and talking with other devs about bugs and such [20:48] bryce: no problem, in the meantime I'll do my part ;) [20:49] awesome [20:49] tjaalton: btw, do you have any ideas on #246585? I was trying to help mdz on it yesterday [20:50] tjaalton: it appears the new -vesa doesn't report its screens correctly to gdk. I've dug through the code from the gdk side of things yesterday, but am thinking to look at it from the -vesa side, but am not sure what angle to approach it [20:51] bryce: the driver is very simple.. I believe the client code is doing something wrong here [20:51] jcristau observed it seems that vesa seems to be using xinerama or thinking its using xinerama [20:51] hmm [20:51] I bet fedora is seeing something similar then [20:52] yeah I've been through the driver source; I doubt the bug is there, but I also dug down pretty deep in gdk and didn't spot it [21:02] compared vesa logs from hardy with the one from that bug.. nothing apparent in sight [21:14] I'll subscribe ubuntu-x to fglrx-installer/nvidia* bugmail [21:17] tseliot, hum are you seeing seg faults starting X now on intrepid w/ nvidia too? [21:18] fglrx most definitely broke in the last day or two (bug 247376) [21:18] Launchpad bug 247376 in fglrx-installer "undefined symbols when trying to load fglrx" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/247376 [21:18] so fglrx doesn't work with xserver 1.5 [21:18] either [21:18] nvidia -173 and -177 work [21:19] but -71 and -96 don't [21:19] well i wonder why i'm segfaulting then on this box w/ 177 [21:19] i see the splash screen and then the X server dies [21:19] splash screen of what? [21:19] usplash? [21:19] nvidia splash screen [21:19] ok, so it's not the same then [21:19] maybe -177 is just buggy ;) [21:19] but yeah usplash is a mess on a bunch of boxes too [21:20] right... [21:20] let's get plymouth! [21:20] the weird thing with the nvidia segfault, there are no errors in the log except not being able to load dri2 [21:21] (plymouth == the new boot-candy for fedora10, using kernel modesetting) [21:21] i only know it's a segfault from starting X on it's own [21:21] ah [21:21] and that's what's breaking usplash? [21:21] no, it's not in ubuntu :) [21:21] oh phew. [21:22] possibly some framebuffer madness [21:38] mario_limonciell: sorry, I haven't updated my Intrepid system yet. I'll do it tomorrow [21:39] tseliot, yeah hopefully it's easily resolvable. i've only got one intrepid nvidia system up and running. unfortunately all the other ones i have still are fglrx [21:39] so SOL for a bit there [21:39] tjaalton: plymouth == works only with Intel? [21:40] *sigh* ETOOMANYBUGS [21:43] tseliot: yes, currently [21:43] http://katzj.livejournal.com/432586.html [21:43] mario_limonciell: did you try with Disable "dri2" in the Module section of your xorg.conf? [21:43] i didn't know disable was a valid keyword [21:43] the warning is harmless [21:43] i'll give that a shot [21:45] mario_limonciell: it's in man xorg.conf [21:45] oh, that screencast is using vesafb, not modesetting [21:45] so it has multiple fallbacks [21:45] mario_limonciell: let me know how it goes [21:46] tjaalton: ok, it's a sensible idea then [21:46] bryce: i'm with you man.. [21:47] tseliot, well no more dri2 error (duh), but still segfaulting [21:47] mario_limonciell: have you tried -173? [21:48] yeah i just rolled back to it fearing something in 177 went wacky [21:49] what the hell to do with nvidia/fglrx bugs that are a) old b) have no logs c) no idea what chip the user has [21:49] going through lrm-2.6.15 [21:50] apport is off by default now... [21:50] so no logs via apport [21:50] tjaalton: have xserver upgrades always been this rough? I don't recall the 1.4 update triggering this many serious issues [21:50] didnt everything dangerous fall out of 1.4? [21:51] bryce: nah, the vendors are just lazy [21:52] mario_limonciell: does it help if you do startx -- -ignoreABI ? [21:52] tjaalton: for old lrm bugs, I'd just let them know the bug's out of date and won't be further investigated here, and kindly ask that they re-test with hardy and report against $package if it still occurs [21:52] "kindly".. forget about it then :) [21:52] *short* [21:52] s/h/n/ [21:52] ah, monty python on the telly [21:52] hehe [21:52] on the plus side, I'm finding myself getting pretty good at gdb [21:53] tjaalton: I receive a lot of emails which say only "I used Envy and now my card doesn't work" :-P [21:53] tseliot: all of our Xorg bugs go that way :-) [21:53] except s/Envy/<$package>/ [21:53] fun fun [21:54] tseliot, well very odd, but i reinstalled 177 again (after downgrading to 173) and it appears to be working now? [21:54] bryce: we should just learn how to read our users' thought, that's all... [21:55] I dream about making a web interface with some regex's to detect if they've included Xorg.0.log, mentioned a crash but not included a backtrace, etc. etc. and have some nice checkboxes (and 'check-all') so us triagers can process those stub bug reports faster [21:55] tjaalton, well i don't know that i would say they are lazy, but there was no predictable release date for xorg 1.5 [21:55] mario_limonciell: did you do rmmod and modprobe before restarting the Xserver? [21:55] tseliot, yeah i did [21:55] so it's very hard to get your schedule together when you don't have a stable list of changes for the ABI and such [21:55] mario_limonciell: and there still isn't but yeah [21:55] mario_limonciell: ok, naive question [21:55] btw, I talked with AMD yesterday. [21:55] about xorg 1.5 support? [21:55] but fedora9 has been out two months, so either they have no fedora users or something is really wrong [21:56] they're working on implementing xrandr 1.2 for fgrx 8.53, which is slated to be released in Sept [21:56] sweet [21:56] betas will be released to testers next month [21:56] bryce, er well i'm not sure you should be mentioning that with ubuntulog sitting around... [21:56] sssh [21:57] :) [21:57] * bryce shushes up [21:57] actually I'm not sure it's private. maybe you know differently though [21:57] well it's not been announced anywhere in the past [21:57] mario_limonciell: we are the ones who signed an NDA, not Bryce [21:58] tseliot, it's not been announced to the beta list either [21:59] but I had thought there was a 3 way NDA via AMD/Canonical/Dell as well [21:59] anyhow though. did they talk about xorg 1.5 support? randr 1.2 is kinda useless without xorg 1.5 :) [22:00] heh, I'm saying no more without a go-ahead ;-) [22:00] works just fine from 1.3 onwards :) [22:00] but I've requested clarification on it [22:00] haha okay [22:01] have I ever mentioned how much I hate secrets? [22:02] :-) [22:02] yeah i wish that they would publicly comment on this kind of stuff [22:02] what would you call the "contours" that are showing in this image: http://imagebin.org/22276 ? [22:03] banding [22:03] because that only happens with the 'ati' driver [22:03] not with the fglrx [22:03] yeah we used to have that in inkscape with gradient patterns [22:03] what causes it? [22:04] color interpolation bugs, [22:04] numerical issues in gradient printing code [22:04] btw, is that background a png or a svg? [22:05] its the default ubuntu one [22:05] ok so a png [22:05] this was a hardy install upgraded to intrepid (before fglrx broke) [22:05] see if you can reproduce it in inkscape - draw a circle and color it with a gradient [22:09] er well i crashed inkscape trying to fill it with a gradient :) [22:09] ill try again [22:09] could also try gimp [22:10] inkscape crashes are quite rare though; I'll bet backtracing that crash would give some handy info [22:10] yeah inkscape definitely does it too [22:10] i did it with a big red circle gradienting to white [22:11] theoretically linearly [22:11] ok, that rules out it being just a png issue then [22:11] i'll put all this info into a bug then [22:12] its in bug 243372 now [22:12] mario_limonciell: Bug 243372 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/243372 is private [22:12] bah [22:12] okay it shouldnt be private :) [22:13] bug 243372 [22:13] Launchpad bug 243372 in xserver-xorg-video-ati "RadeonHD 3670, unable to show entire color scheme" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/243372 [23:16] there, lrm-2.6.15 cleared and unsubscribed [23:17] ~45 bugs less to worry about [23:18] thought you might be in here Bryce :) [23:18] bug #242990 [23:18] Launchpad bug 242990 in xorg "xorg does not synchronize to vertical refresh" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/242990 [23:19] I can't tell if it is my monitors ghosting or if I really do see what he sees, but what say you an that bug? [23:19] looking [23:19] domo [23:20] Awsoonn: does it make a difference if compiz is enabled/disabled? [23:20] let me disable and see [23:21] more noticeable when disabled [23:22] hmm, well without seeing a screenshot it sounds like https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/96991, but that should go away with compiz is disabled [23:22] oh! here we go! [23:22] Launchpad bug 96991 in xorg-server "3D stuff breaks with Compiz: Redirected Direct Rendering is needed in DRI" [Unknown,Fix released] [23:22] I took a screenshot of it [23:23] I can't believe that worked. :) let me attach it [23:29] *posted* [23:33] hmm [23:34] Is there somewhere that I should tell xorg to use vsync? [23:36] well, you can specify it in xorg.conf [23:36] what you might want to do is compare your monitor's documented rates against what's listed in Xorg.0.log to see if something's misdetected [23:36] or try swapping monitors, if that's easier [23:37] I notice in the Xorg.0.log there's some warnings about pipe-A issues, so you could setting that option (google launchpad for 'Pipe-A' quirk) [23:37] however that usually exhibits itself as a crash on lid close, not like this [23:37] I'd encourage you to post your Xorg.0.log, for comparison against the original reporter's [23:38] also, it couldn't hurt to test booting Intrepid alpha-1 or alpha-2 when it's out, just in case this issue's already fixed upstream [23:39] if it's a mis-detection of sync rate, you could also try the NoDDC option [23:39] my Section "Monitor" contains nothing for a refresh rate, is that anything? [23:39] that just means you're letting xserver autodetect it [23:39] which works 99% of the time :-) [23:40] Screen resolution settings window shows that it is set at..... 50Hz [23:40] oh, also another approach if you suspect modeline issues, is to try alternate resolutions and refresh rates [23:41] modeline bugs tend to be specific to one particular setting [23:41] interesting that the nvidia settings tool says I'm at 60 Hz [23:42] you can also use 'ddcprobe' and 'get-edid | parse-edid' to check things [23:42] oh you're using nvidia? the log shows intel... [23:42] yeah there's a known bug with -nvidia where it reports wrong refresh rates [23:42] my montiors report 60Hz as well [23:43] those logs are the OP's [23:43] nVidia knows about the bug (I think it's in their release note and/or faq), but I don't know of any plans they have to fix it [23:44] so MY issue is nvidia, but his is something else you think? [23:59] it's quite possible [23:59] it's very typical for unrelated bugs to have similar symptoms [23:59] and this gets confusing especially when the symptoms are described in text, rather than screenshots