[ubuntu-x] Fatal server error: Couldn't bind memory for BO front buffer

Bryce Harrington bryce at canonical.com
Wed Dec 10 22:37:34 GMT 2008

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:06:42PM +0100, Tormod Volden wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Bryce Harrington <bryce at canonical.com> wrote:
> > Hi Tormod, thanks for all the backporting work!
> Well, if I had known Timo would be so fast to upgrade it all in
> Jaunty, I wouldn't have done so much I guess :) My "edgy" stuff is
> obsoleted after a few days. But that's good for progress!

Yep, maybe next time it'll save some time to wait until after the
initial import to doing the backports.  But probably has been useful
already to folks.  :-)

> > Would you be able to provide backported -intel 2.5 (and/or a 2.5-git*)
> > for hardy and intrepid?
> I already have post-2.5 intel packages for Hardy and Intrepid in the
> xorg-edgers PPA. Since I don't have Intel hardware myself (Santa do
> you hear me) I am depending on the feedback from other people to know
> if it actually works. Sounds like some people have success.

Okay great, hopefully someone can test them out and let us know if
they're booting okay.  If not, I'll at least check them before sending
out the bulk mail.

> What appears as 2.4.97 (intrepid) and (hardy) is in fact from
> git master so it's 2.6 alpha (or 2.7 alpha now that 2.6 has branched
> off). The versions are just a result of the sloppy versioning in
> upstream configure.ac and the archive constraints (increasing versions
> only).

Aha, I was wondering that.  So that should work fine.

> Because of this I can actually go back to 2.5.1 while bumping the
> version. But I wish there was a way I could offer different branches.
> I guess we need more PPAs :)

Would you like me to enquire into getting more PPAs set up for this
project?  How many would you like?

> > One bug-work thing I have planned is to bulk-mail -intel bug reporters
> > once Alpha-2 is out, and request they re-test.  Obviously they would be
> > able to test against a jaunty live-cd, but I'd also like to give them
> > the option of installing a backport of the current 2.5 driver for users
> > that would like to test it on an existing intrepid or hardy install.
> By the way, what's up with the daily-live, hasn't been updated for 3 weeks?

Not sure?  It looks like it's up to date?  Is it wrong?

I can speak with slangasek to find out what's going on if it's broke.

> > The new libdrm makes it a bit tricky to provide the backports, but I was
> > thinking since you already have them in the Edgers PPA, it might be a
> > good place for providing these driver backports too?
> Yes, that should work. We could also make a intel-testing PPA and only
> push what's needed, but it would be pretty close to xorg-edgers I
> guess.

I think xorg-edgers would be fine.
> Before we ask people to test with these builds we have to make sure
> they actually work pretty well. I can start making the 2.5.1 packages
> soonish and let you test.

Excellent, thanks.

> > Based on prior experience with bulk-mail with retesting for -ati, we
> > were able to get a bunch of bugs resolved.  I've got the scripts to send
> > the bug mail, so just need the packages for folks to test.
> >
> > Bryce
> >
> > P.S. we could do the same again for -ati; what do you think?
> >
> Yes, the recent -ati changes are less revolutionary. The
> straight-forward packages (no dependencies) in my personal PPA should
> be fine for -ati testing.

Okay cool.  We can focus on -intel first, and then -ati later on.


More information about the Ubuntu-x mailing list