From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-22 13:36:55
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 22 09:36:45 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.6326 Tue Apr 22 09:36:45 2003 @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +Bug#: 111349 +Product: GStreamer +Version: 0.6.1 +OS: other +OS Details: +Status: NEW +Resolution: +Severity: blocker +Priority: Normal +Component: gstreamer (core) +AssignedTo: gst...@bu... +ReportedBy: ha...@ha... +QAContact: gst...@bu... +TargetMilestone: 0.6.x +URL: +Summary: gstreamer library foobars gtk+ with XInitThreads + +Simple test case, to save as test.c: + +#include <gtk/gtk.h> +#include <X11/Xlib.h> + + +int main (int argc, char **argv) +{ + if (XInitThreads() == 0) + { + g_message ("XInitThreads() = 0"); + return 1; + } + + + gtk_init (&argc, &argv); + + + return 0; +} + +Compile with the following line: +gcc -O -o test test.c `pkg-config --libs --cflags gtk+-2.0` +launch ./test, it returns within a second + +Compile with the following line: +gcc -O -o test test.c `pkg-config --libs --cflags gtk+-2.0 +gstreamer-0.6` +launch ./test, and see it hang... Here's the backtrace from it: + +#0 0xffffe002 in ?? () +#1 0x40611c7a in _XUnregisterFilter () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 +#2 0x406a77fc in XGetExtensionVersion () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#3 0x406a9b9f in _XiCheckExtInit () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#4 0x406a82f3 in XListInputDevices () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#5 0x402d5633 in _gdk_input_common_init () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#6 0x402d603a in _gdk_input_init () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#7 0x402afd6b in gdk_display_open () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#8 0x402900e7 in gdk_display_open_default_libgtk_only () + from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#9 0x400fbd3a in gtk_init_check () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#10 0x400fbd76 in gtk_init () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#11 0x080487a2 in main () +#12 0x420156a4 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6 + +We get a slightly better trace using the old pthread code: +#0 0x405bc4f5 in __pthread_sigsuspend () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#1 0x405bbca8 in __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal () + from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#2 0x405bdfd0 in __pthread_alt_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#3 0x405ba170 in pthread_mutex_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#4 0x40790c7a in _XUnregisterFilter () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 +#5 0x408267fc in XGetExtensionVersion () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#6 0x40828b9f in _XiCheckExtInit () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#7 0x408272f3 in XListInputDevices () from /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 +#8 0x402d5633 in _gdk_input_common_init () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#9 0x402d603a in _gdk_input_init () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#10 0x402afd6b in gdk_display_open () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#11 0x402900e7 in gdk_display_open_default_libgtk_only () + from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#12 0x400fbd3a in gtk_init_check () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#13 0x400fbd76 in gtk_init () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#14 0x080487a2 in main () +#15 0x4061aa47 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 + +The output from ldd test: + libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x40028000) + libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4027c000) + libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0x402ea000) + libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0x40304000) + libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 (0x40317000) + libpangox-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 (0x40338000) + libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0x40345000) + libgstreamer-0.6.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgstreamer-0.6.so.0 (0x40378000) + libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0x403ea000) + libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0x40420000) + libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40424000) + libgthread-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0 (0x40428000) + libxml2.so.2 => /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2 (0x4042d000) + libz.so.1 => /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0x40518000) + libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/libm.so.6 (0x40526000) + libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x40549000) + libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0x405b3000) + libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x42000000) + libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x405c1000) + libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0x406a0000) + libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 (0x406a4000) + libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x406ad000) + libXft.so.2 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXft.so.2 (0x406bb000) + libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0x406cd000) + libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0x406d5000) + libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0x406fa000) + libpopt.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpopt.so.0 (0x4074c000) + /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000) + libexpat.so.0 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0 (0x40754000) + +The output from pkg-config --cflags --libs gstreamer-0.6: +-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread +-I/usr/include/gstreamer-0.6 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 +-I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/libxml2 -Wl,--export-dynamic +-pthread -lgstreamer-0.6 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lgthread-2.0 +-lxml2 -lz -lm -lglib-2.0 + +This bug is marked as blocker as it makes the GStreamer version of Totem +fail to even start. |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-22 13:42:35
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 22 09:36:45 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.9357 Tue Apr 22 09:42:29 2003 @@ -117,6 +117,11 @@ -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/libxml2 -Wl,--export-dynamic -pthread -lgstreamer-0.6 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lgthread-2.0 -lxml2 -lz -lm -lglib-2.0 This bug is marked as blocker as it makes the GStreamer version of Totem fail to even start. + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-22 09:42 ------- +This was tested on a RHL9 system with all the nice updates and the +GStreamer 0.6.1 RPMs, it also happens on a Debian Sid PPC system with +CVS 0.6.x HEAD. |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-22 14:31:41
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 22 09:42:29 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.762 Tue Apr 22 10:31:37 2003 @@ -1,20 +1,20 @@ Bug#: 111349 -Product: GStreamer -Version: 0.6.1 +Product: gtk+ +Version: unspecified OS: other OS Details: Status: NEW Resolution: Severity: blocker Priority: Normal -Component: gstreamer (core) -AssignedTo: gst...@bu... +Component: gtk +AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... -TargetMilestone: 0.6.x +TargetMilestone: --- URL: Summary: gstreamer library foobars gtk+ with XInitThreads Simple test case, to save as test.c: #include <gtk/gtk.h> @@ -122,6 +122,20 @@ fail to even start. ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-22 09:42 ------- This was tested on a RHL9 system with all the nice updates and the GStreamer 0.6.1 RPMs, it also happens on a Debian Sid PPC system with CVS 0.6.x HEAD. + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-22 10:31 ------- +It's a bug either in gtk+ or glibc 2.3.x (a behaviour change that +would break gtk+ ?): + +Same test case, use with: +gcc -O -o test test.c -pthread `pkg-config --cflags --libs gtk+-2.0` +Remove -pthread and it will work properly. + +Tested with different compilers, both 2.96.x and 3.2.x break +Tested with different kernels (and architectures) +Tested with different glibc: works ok with a 2.2.x glibc + +Backtrace is still the same. |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-22 16:38:59
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ot...@re.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 22 10:31:37 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.15671 Tue Apr 22 12:38:55 2003 @@ -136,6 +136,23 @@ Tested with different compilers, both 2.96.x and 3.2.x break Tested with different kernels (and architectures) Tested with different glibc: works ok with a 2.2.x glibc Backtrace is still the same. + +------- Additional Comments From ot...@re... 2003-04-22 12:38 ------- +It's 99% certain to be a bug in the X libraries. +I can't reproduce it though here on a stock RH9 system. + +The first step would be to get a copy of the XFree86 +libraries with debugging information to get a better +backtrace. + +(See: + +http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-list/1999-January/msg00019.html + +which seems to be the same problem; though it was a little +uncertain because the app in question was doing lots of +somewhat questionable stuff.) + |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-26 18:28:01
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ju...@mo.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 22 12:38:55 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.24608 Sat Apr 26 14:27:55 2003 @@ -153,6 +153,45 @@ http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-list/1999-January/msg00019.html which seems to be the same problem; though it was a little uncertain because the app in question was doing lots of somewhat questionable stuff.) + +------- Additional Comments From ju...@mo... 2003-04-26 14:27 ------- + +Here is the backtrace with debugging infos... + +Hope this helps.. + +gtk+-2.0 version 2.2.1 +Xfree 4.3 + +(gdb) bt +#0 0x0f04e044 in sigsuspend () from /lib/libc.so.6 +#1 0x0f17cadc in __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal () from +/lib/libpthread.so.0 +#2 0x0f17ec3c in __pthread_alt_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#3 0x0f17b02c in pthread_mutex_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 +#4 0x0ef7e700 in _XLockDisplay (dpy=0x10056640) at locking.c:478 +#5 0x0edf2238 in XGetExtensionVersion (dpy=0x10056640, name=0xedf5a18 +"XInputExtension") at XGetVers.c:108 +#6 0x0edf4dfc in _XiCheckExtInit (dpy=0x10056640, version_index=1) at +XExtInt.c:198 +#7 0x0edf3004 in XListInputDevices (dpy=0x10056640, +ndevices=0x7ffff67c) at XListDev.c:85 +#8 0x0f967030 in _gdk_input_common_init () from +/usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#9 0x0f967c28 in _gdk_input_init () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#10 0x0f93f0e0 in gdk_display_open () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#11 0x0f91d978 in gdk_display_open_default_libgtk_only () from +/usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#12 0x0fa920c8 in gtk_init_check () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#13 0x0fa920fc in gtk_init () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 +#14 0x0fe7ea9c in bonobo_dock_layout_parse_string () from +/usr/lib/libbonoboui-2.so.0 +#15 0x0fddde04 in gnome_program_postinit () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 +#16 0x0fdde11c in gnome_program_initv () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 +#17 0x0fdddef8 in gnome_program_init () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 +#18 0x10019e44 in main (argc=1, argv=0x7ffff974) at totem.c:3131 +#19 0x0f037d04 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 +(gdb) |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-26 19:09:14
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ot...@re.... --- shadow/111349 Sat Apr 26 14:27:55 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.21887 Sat Apr 26 15:09:10 2003 @@ -192,6 +192,17 @@ #15 0x0fddde04 in gnome_program_postinit () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 #16 0x0fdde11c in gnome_program_initv () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 #17 0x0fdddef8 in gnome_program_init () from /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 #18 0x10019e44 in main (argc=1, argv=0x7ffff974) at totem.c:3131 #19 0x0f037d04 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 (gdb) + +------- Additional Comments From ot...@re... 2003-04-26 15:09 ------- +Well, what that indicates is that someone didn't _unlock_ +the display, so the attempt to lock it again hangs. + +Which is going to be harder to debug; you'll +basically have to put breakpoints in XLockDisplay() and +XUnlockDisplay() and step through the init sequence until +you find the point where the display is locked and +then not unlocked. + |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-27 19:36:28
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Sat Apr 26 15:09:10 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.21347 Sun Apr 27 15:36:25 2003 @@ -203,6 +203,11 @@ Which is going to be harder to debug; you'll basically have to put breakpoints in XLockDisplay() and XUnlockDisplay() and step through the init sequence until you find the point where the display is locked and then not unlocked. + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-27 15:36 ------- +Created an attachment (id=16062) +locks debugging with debug X libraries + |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-27 19:38:43
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Sun Apr 27 15:36:25 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.22533 Sun Apr 27 15:38:37 2003 @@ -208,6 +208,12 @@ ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-27 15:36 ------- Created an attachment (id=16062) locks debugging with debug X libraries + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-27 15:38 ------- +In the log above, the bug is pretty obvious. There is locking before +around the library's init functions, and inside it. + +Owen, how do you propose we go about escalating this bug to the X people? |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-27 19:54:52
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Sun Apr 27 15:38:37 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.31020 Sun Apr 27 15:54:48 2003 @@ -214,6 +214,20 @@ ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-27 15:38 ------- In the log above, the bug is pretty obvious. There is locking before around the library's init functions, and inside it. Owen, how do you propose we go about escalating this bug to the X people? + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-27 15:54 ------- +Looking at the source code for the X input module: +http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/lib/Xi/XListDev.c?rev=3.5&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup + +XListInputDevices seems to call LockDisplay a tiny bit too early: +1) _XiCheckExtInit will lock the display by itself +2) if the _XiCheckExtInit fails, the display isn't unlocked + +I suggest moving the LockDisplay call until after the _XiCheckExtInit +call. Owen, can you see if that makes sense? + +If you think that's a good resolution to the problem, I'll close this +bug and open a new bug with Red Hat and Debian to push the fix upstream. |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-29 20:30:31
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Sun Apr 27 15:54:48 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.26385 Tue Apr 29 16:30:27 2003 @@ -4,19 +4,19 @@ OS: other OS Details: Status: NEW Resolution: Severity: blocker Priority: Normal -Component: gtk +Component: gdk AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... TargetMilestone: --- URL: -Summary: gstreamer library foobars gtk+ with XInitThreads +Summary: libXi with XInitThreads is broken Simple test case, to save as test.c: #include <gtk/gtk.h> #include <X11/Xlib.h> @@ -228,6 +228,9 @@ I suggest moving the LockDisplay call until after the _XiCheckExtInit call. Owen, can you see if that makes sense? If you think that's a good resolution to the problem, I'll close this bug and open a new bug with Red Hat and Debian to push the fix upstream. + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-29 16:30 ------- +Sorry for the spam |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-29 23:07:55
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 29 16:30:27 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.22753 Tue Apr 29 19:07:44 2003 @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ If you think that's a good resolution to the problem, I'll close this bug and open a new bug with Red Hat and Debian to push the fix upstream. ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-29 16:30 ------- Sorry for the spam + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-29 19:07 ------- +*** Bug 111880 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 13:51:10
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by gar...@ho.... --- shadow/111349 Tue Apr 29 19:07:44 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.13047 Wed Apr 30 09:51:04 2003 @@ -10,12 +10,13 @@ Component: gdk AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... TargetMilestone: --- URL: +Cc: gar...@ho... Summary: libXi with XInitThreads is broken Simple test case, to save as test.c: #include <gtk/gtk.h> #include <X11/Xlib.h> |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 13:53:19
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 09:51:04 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.14169 Wed Apr 30 09:53:15 2003 @@ -235,6 +235,11 @@ ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-29 16:30 ------- Sorry for the spam ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-29 19:07 ------- *** Bug 111880 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-30 09:53 ------- +Created an attachment (id=16145) +patch for XFree86 4.3.0 + |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 13:54:31
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 09:53:15 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.14678 Wed Apr 30 09:54:27 2003 @@ -1,13 +1,13 @@ Bug#: 111349 Product: gtk+ Version: unspecified OS: other OS Details: -Status: NEW -Resolution: +Status: RESOLVED +Resolution: NOTGNOME Severity: blocker Priority: Normal Component: gdk AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... @@ -240,6 +240,10 @@ *** Bug 111880 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-30 09:53 ------- Created an attachment (id=16145) patch for XFree86 4.3.0 + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-30 09:54 ------- +Close the bug. Point your XFree86 maintainer to this bug for a fix. It +has already been sent to Red Hat, Debian and Mandrake. |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 14:13:00
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ot...@re.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 09:54:27 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.24210 Wed Apr 30 10:12:57 2003 @@ -244,6 +244,19 @@ patch for XFree86 4.3.0 ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-30 09:54 ------- Close the bug. Point your XFree86 maintainer to this bug for a fix. It has already been sent to Red Hat, Debian and Mandrake. + +------- Additional Comments From ot...@re... 2003-04-30 10:12 ------- +Sorry to be slow on this, but I don't think the patch +is at all correct, though I'd have to do more research +to say what the right patch is. + +A) _XiCheckExtInit() is called from many, many other + functions in exactly the same fashion. + +B) If you look at the sources for_XiCheckExtInit(), + you'll see that it assumes that the display is + *locked*, and, e.g, unlocks it on failure. + |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 14:25:05
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by fc...@ma.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 10:12:57 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.30613 Wed Apr 30 10:25:01 2003 @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ Component: gdk AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... TargetMilestone: --- URL: -Cc: gar...@ho... +Cc: fc...@ma...,gar...@ho... Summary: libXi with XInitThreads is broken Simple test case, to save as test.c: #include <gtk/gtk.h> #include <X11/Xlib.h> |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-04-30 14:55:42
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 10:25:01 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.11760 Wed Apr 30 10:55:38 2003 @@ -257,6 +257,15 @@ functions in exactly the same fashion. B) If you look at the sources for_XiCheckExtInit(), you'll see that it assumes that the display is *locked*, and, e.g, unlocks it on failure. + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-04-30 10:55 ------- +I must say I'm a bit confused at the fact that _XiCheckExtInit calls +XGetExtensionVersion and vice-versa. + +The only calls to XGetExtensionVersion will be in _XiCheckExtInit(), +and possibly in widget set/applications. + +Should XGetExtensionVersion lock the display by itself ? |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-05-03 20:14:41
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by lou...@be.... --- shadow/111349 Wed Apr 30 10:55:38 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.12106 Sat May 3 16:14:36 2003 @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ Component: gdk AssignedTo: gtk...@gt... ReportedBy: ha...@ha... QAContact: gst...@bu... TargetMilestone: --- URL: -Cc: fc...@ma...,gar...@ho... +Cc: fc...@ma...,gar...@ho...,lou...@be... Summary: libXi with XInitThreads is broken Simple test case, to save as test.c: #include <gtk/gtk.h> #include <X11/Xlib.h> @@ -266,6 +266,9 @@ XGetExtensionVersion and vice-versa. The only calls to XGetExtensionVersion will be in _XiCheckExtInit(), and possibly in widget set/applications. Should XGetExtensionVersion lock the display by itself ? + +------- Additional Comments From lou...@be... 2003-05-03 16:14 ------- +Does the version in rawhide fix this issue? |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2003-06-20 20:04:50
|
Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 Changed by ha...@ha.... --- shadow/111349 Sat May 3 16:14:36 2003 +++ shadow/111349.tmp.17858 Fri Jun 20 16:04:42 2003 @@ -269,6 +269,9 @@ and possibly in widget set/applications. Should XGetExtensionVersion lock the display by itself ? ------- Additional Comments From lou...@be... 2003-05-03 16:14 ------- Does the version in rawhide fix this issue? + +------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2003-06-20 16:04 ------- +*** Bug 115625 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |
From: <bug...@wi...> - 2004-04-12 18:38:44
|
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111349 gtk+ | gdk | Ver: unspecified ha...@ha... changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lu...@si... ------- Additional Comments From ha...@ha... 2004-04-12 14:38 ------- *** Bug 139690 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. |
From: <bug...@bu...> - 2005-06-24 06:58:39
|
Please DO NOT reply to this by email. All additional comments should be m= ade in the comments box of this bug report. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111349 gtk+ | gdk | Ver: unspecified ------- Additional Comments From Bastien Nocera 2005-06-24 06:58 ------- *** Bug 308812 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. |