Xubuntu daily build report
hpp3 at lavabit.com
Wed Sep 17 17:28:59 UTC 2008
"Cody A.W. Somerville" <cody-somerville at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Hi Eddy,
> Thanks for taking the time to write this up. I always enjoyed reading them.
> Please see below for inline comments.
> > -gpicview replaced Ristretto? What was wrong with Ristretto? (grr...
> > more gnome creeping in...)
> How is gpicview anymore "gnome" than Ristretto is?
> Ristretto dependencies: libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.20.0), libc6 (>= 2.4), libcairo2
> (>= 1.5.18), libdbus-1-3 (>= 1.1.1), libdbus-glib-1-2 (>= 0.74), libexif12,
> libexo-0.3-0 (>= 0.3.4), libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.12.0), libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.12.0),
> libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.20.1), libthunar-vfs-1-2 (>= 0.9.0), libxfce4util4 (>=
> 4.4.2), libxfcegui4-4 (>= 4.4.2)
> gpicview dependencies: libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.20.0), libc6 (>= 2.6.1-1),
> libcairo2 (>= 1.4.0), libfontconfig1 (>= 2.4.0), libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.14.0),
> libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.12.0), libjpeg62, libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.19.0), libx11-6,
> libxcomposite1 (>= 1:0.3-1), libxcursor1 (>> 1.1.2), libxdamage1 (>= 1:1.1),
> libxext6, libxfixes3 (>= 1:4.0.1), libxi6, libxinerama1, libxrandr2 (>=
> 2:1.2.0), libxrender1
Ok, I see my mistake. I SWEAR the first time I opened gpicview the
'About' box said it was a "Lightweight image viewer for Gnome".
I must be getting dyslexic as well as nearsighted...
Besides that, I thought Ristretto was a good fit because of it being
in the Xfce "family".
> > gpicview also has some security bugs which you guys probably already
> > know about, but I wouldn't want to be too hasty:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=495968)
> > Is the version in *buntu the patched one?
> Yes. Your link reports bug marked fix in version 0.1.9-2. *
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/gpicview shows Intrepid at 0.1.9-2.*
Ok. The conversation at the end of that thread led me to believe that
it may have been mistakenly marked.
> > -The new wallpaper looks sweet. Great job [insert artist name here]!
> I don't think we've changed the wallpaper yet since Hardy.
*edvard turns head sideways*
weird, maybe cause it's on a different monitor. This one looks similar
but smoother and more "glowy"
> > -Audacious. Mixed feelings...
> > I guess I'm just not one for tiny skinnable media players. At least it
> > doesn't look like a Winamp clone out of the box, I'll look forward to
> > giving this one a workout.
> Is there another music player that you think might be a better fit? If so,
> which one?
I'll agree one hundred percent with Vincent's reply to this one.
All those skinnable players look funky and 'out-of-place' to me and
always have, especially when you have to view it at double size due to
having a high-resolution monitor (hmm... imagine a player that uses
I do admit it's nice to have a separate media player. Totem's labeling
as a "Movie Player" always threw me off...
I don't know which one to suggest, honestly. I'll probably get used to
Hell, I was happy with Xfmedia (despite xine lib bugs...), who am I to
> > I'll also post my box specs and some benchmarks and if anybody's
> > interested or if anyone has suggestions of bugs to look for, let me
> > know.
> I'd be very interested. You can see some work I did on it at
BTW- I noticed a few more things last night.
-First start of Mozilla Firefox started up with two tabs of ubufox
startpage that were both blank and a tab of the license page.
Subsequent runs brought up only one ubufox page. Still blank.
-I opened a terminal and grep'd dmesg for errors. Apparently uvesafb
crapped out at some point because it couldn't find v86d.
A cursory web search looks like uvesafb has replaced vesafb as the
default framebuffer driver (confirm?) which depends on v86d
(http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/fb/uvesafb.txt). Doing a
web search for this bug came up with a healthy handful of reports so I
assume it's being worked on.
Either way, I assume that one's way upstream...
That's all I have for now, I'm downloading today's daily for more
More information about the xubuntu-devel