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