Unhappy Xorg upgrade

Da Rock rock_on_the_web at comcen.com.au
Fri Jan 30 01:11:26 PST 2009


On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 08:40 -0500, Robert Noland wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 07:46 -0500, Alex Goncharov wrote:
> > ,--- You/Bruce (Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:06:45 +0000) ----*
> > |     One theory is that somehow the mouse driver ioctls which are passed 
> > | to ums, are somehow hosing USB, although why that would be, I don't 
> > | understand. ums currently doesn't have driver instrumentation in that path.
> > | 
> > |     I pulled a fairly detailed IRC log of my collaborative debugging 
> > | session with Robert, please ping me if you need details of this.
> > `----------------------------------------------------*
> > 
> > Thank you for the detailed write up!  No help to me, though -- on my
> > Latitude laptop, there was no problem with any mouse: USB or the
> > built-in "pointing device".  It was the keyboard -- and, trust me, I
> > did try many variations of the machine configuration, and I did do a
> > lot of reading on various relevant topics (writing, too, as you have
> > seen :-()
> > 
> > As I mentioned elsewhere, my way of resolving the problem after a
> > one-and-a-half day's of struggle was to revert to the old X (on that
> > laptop).
> > 
> > On the topic of how this upgrade was introduced, I can't help but
> > refer to my recent experience helping to fix TWM:
> > 
> > ,--- Eeri Kask (Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:21:17 +0200) ----*
> > | > I have used the new version of TWM for five days, using it less
> > | > intensively than usual. No problems in seen during my (light) use.
> > | 
> > | Hello Alex, no problem at all!  Improved solutions have priority over 
> > | promised deadlines.
> > | 
> > | Thank you for your time helping to improve TWM,  :-)
> > |
> > `----------------------------------------------------*
> > 
> > Eeri Kask and I worked together all past September on fixing TWM
> > crashes: I was willingly trying his multiple versions of the code, but
> > I knew what I was risking, could choose convenient times for building
> > and trying every new version (we tried about 30 of them) -- and I
> > could always go back to the previous version (or the original TWM from
> > ports).
> > 
> > I would be happy to try a new X on my machines, if it were labeled as
> > experimental, with an easy way to revert to the old X (while being in
> > the testing stage).  As it is, this upgrade brought a lot of problems
> > to unsuspecting people, at the time they don't quite choose, with
> > potential dangers not disclosed.
> > 
> > In honesty, this upgrade should have been presented this way, way
> > before the code was placed in the ports source tree:
> > 
> >  * We'll have a new X in ports soon -- there are multiple reports of
> >    problems with it on Linux.
> > 
> >  * We want to try it on FreeBSD -- but nobody is forcing you to do the
> >    upgrade.
> > 
> >  * If you, of your own free will, choose to upgrade, you may have
> >    hours and days of problems -- but heck, it was your choice.
> > 
> >  * If your problems cannot be fixed, you'll have to figure out
> >    something yourself.
> > 
> >  * If you choose not to upgrade, you are frozen with the pre-existing
> >    ports collection: there may be no automated ways to upgrade your
> >    packages, with the old X in place.  Of course, you can somehow get
> >    pieces on new ports, unrelated to X.
> 
> I've had patches available for probably a couple of months now posted to
> freebsd-x11 at .  For the few people who tested it, I had no real issues
> reported.  We were stalled for a long time, While X kept moving, so the
> amount of change was large.  This update also brings in support for a
> lot of people who are running newer hardware.
> 

Could you explain what new support is available for hardware or point
out a link to this info?




More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list