xzgv in Fedora broken?

[Paulo Cavalcanti]

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl> wrote:

> Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Rahul Sundaram <
>> sundaram at fedoraproject.org <mailto:sundaram at fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
>>
>>    Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>>        Note I'm looking in to fixing the xzgv thumbnails issue. Why? To
>>        show that actually reporting problems helps I guess.
>>
>>
>>    Thanks Hans. It is amazing, people who knew about the issue would be
>>    not reporting the bug but be willing to build conflicting packages
>>    in another repository.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please, Rahul
>>
>> xzgv does not impact anything.
>>
>
> True, never the less I've fixed it: a gtk callback functions return value
> was declared void while it should be gboolean and it should return TRUE,
> that this worked with gcc3 is just plain luck.
>
> A patch is forth coming, I'm still looking into some of the thumbnails
> being wrong for images whose width is not a multiple of 4. Its a
> pitch/stride != width issue, and I've already located it, but it needs some
> surgery to fix cleanly.
>

You are good. I thought it would take longer.



>
>
>  Once more, here is the fixed memtest86+ for F10. It works just fine (for
>> me) even on new Intel G45.
>>
>> http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/memtest86+-2.11-3.fc10.src.rpm<http://people.atrpms.net/%7Epcavalcanti/srpms/memtest86+-2.11-3.fc10.src.rpm>
>>
>>
> Yes this is a more important issue, thanks for bringing it to our
> attention. First of all it would help if you could post a patch with your
> prepared fix, that is less cumbersome to take a quick peek then an srpm.
> This is important because, for example yesterday I clicked at the bug report
> you linked and when only seeing srpm's went on with other stuff. If there
> would have been a patch attached I would have clicked it, and if it is
> cleanly I would have tried to get it in to Fedora asap. But the srpm was
> just too big of a hurdle (given that memtest is not a package I maintain,
> nor is xzgv btw).
>
>
Here are the differences using Fedora original spec (although the .src.rpm
is slightly different):

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/patches/spec.patch

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/patches/setup.patch

The fix is simple, and the grub entry is going to be this way:


title Memtest86+ v2.11
        kernel --type=netbsd /memtest86+-2.11


It has been working fine for me, with a lot of different computers,
for about two years.

Thanks.

-- 
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090107/7c19ba34/attachment.htm>