sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: "Bearcat M. Sandor" <sourcemage AT feline-soul.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:45:37 -0600 (MDT)
MafooClock,
I've been running it just fine for months now too. The only problem I seem
to have is that when i attempt to run anything (mostly games) that require
the sdl libraries, it crashes it. That may be a 64-bit issue though.
Do you see the same thing?
Bearcat
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> Jeremy Kolb wrote:
>> Thomas Orgis wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:09:33 +0200
>>> schrieb "Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik" <ruskie AT mages.ath.cx>:
>>>
>>>> Descriptions and various dependencies in test(i.e. spell foo depends
>>>> on
>>>> X11-LIBS but it also needs libfoo and libbar when using -modular) are
>>>> the
>>>> main reasons for it not being in test.
>>> The descriptions are an issue - particulary since upstream even doesn't
>>> have an opinion on these apparently.
>>> But could that help:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.x.org/wiki/ModuleDescriptions?highlight=%28module%29
>>>
>>> ?
>>> On the technical side, I must say that I don't have monolithic xorg on
>>> any box. The modular one works fine. Sometimes I forget that it's not
>>> standard already;-) Some stuff cast out of higher knowledge than by
>>> dependencies, but getting it into test would help these...
>>>
>>>
>>> Thomas.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SM-Discuss mailing list
>>> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>>
>> I've been running it for months without a problem. It really should go
>> into test.
>>
>> Jeremy
>>
>
> Same here -- been running it with NO problems (x86_64, even). The only
> issues I had in the past were when a feature was missing, and I needed
> some -modular component to get it, but I never knew what was what. So
> what some of you are saying seems true: we really should get the
> descriptions in there.
>
>
>
> - - Matthew Clark (MaffooClock)
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SM-Discuss mailing list
>> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>>
>> !DSPAM:1,4627686429989921919802!
>>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
>
> iD8DBQFGJ2sc7vwGAOVJvJ8RAu84AKCZ+7/Vkk57zJ78mw3wEygV6EUKmQCgp7v7
> ZuMsULydZjjMP1dNyNOiM6k=
> =Y8SI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
-
[SM-Discuss] xorg,
Treeve Jelbert, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Thomas Orgis, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Jeremy Kolb, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Bearcat M. Sandor, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg, Bearcat M. Sandor, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Bearcat M. Sandor, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg, David Brown, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Jeremy Kolb, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Eric Sandall, 04/19/2007
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg, Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
George Sherwood, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/19/2007
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg, Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/19/2007
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg, Eric Sandall, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Matthew Clark, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Thomas Orgis, 04/19/2007
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/19/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.