To stop further mailing, visit here or write:
PinpointMediaServices, 4255 E. Charleston Blvd. Suite D-345, Las Vegas, NV 89104
PinpointMediaServices, 4255 E. Charleston Blvd. Suite D-345, Las Vegas, NV 89104
Am Freitag, den 12.03.2010, 22:25 +0200 schrieb Pekka Paalanen: On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:51:34 +0100 Uwe Bugla < uwe. ... @gmxde > wrote: "Note, that the Nvidia proprietary driver....." Lapse No. 3: Misleading usage of expressions. Everybody talking about the "Nvidia proprietary driver" in the graphic card context of Nvidia cards normallly means the blob driver shipped by Nvidia (closed source driver!) which does not have any problems with stuff like Compiz or other 3D applications. I do not like blob drivers for a whole bunch of reasons. As you are definitely using the wrong expression it remains your personal secret what you are trying to express or say. One of the most common reasons for problems with Nouveau are the remnants of the proprietary driver. Since you did not provide kernel log, X log, nor glxinfo output, I of course assumed the most probable case. A stale libglx from the blob kills OpenGL, for instance. Furthermore, you cannot have the Nvidia proprietary 3D driver running by default, and then use the Nouveau 3D driver on selected apps. If you use *any* part of Nouveau, you cannot have *any* part of the proprietary driver, and vice versa. They cannot live together at all. I'm sorry I guessed your problem wrong. There was no real information to begin the diagnosis with. "Problems are expected on the OpenGL front....." Lapse No. 4: I did not mention nearly all driver parts of the Gallium drivers carrying the "GL" in their names just by chance. I reflect while I am typing messages. I explicitly mentioned that the versions of the driver parts carrying the "GL" in their names are NOT responsible for the breakage that I reported. Thus it still remains your personal secret what you mean by "OpenGL front". Actually, they are. Mesa libGL will try to load nouveau_dri.so to provide hardware accelerated 3D rendering. At this time OpenGL (via Mesa) is the only real user of nouveau_dri.so. nouveau_dri.so may be loaded by the X server (AIGLX) or the application (direct rendering) when they load libGL. In short, having nouveau_dri.so will break OpenGL and perhaps kill the X server in the AIGLX case. Lapse No. 6: Instead of repeating the core message of my request for 4 times in this mail (how insane!) I propose to change this page in the following way: 1. Wipe off the following stupid idiotic crap: "Warning : Nouveau's developers don't want people to build gallium drivers now, and do not support it at all. They also don't want bug reports on gallium ATM. This is code in rapid development. Bug reports for this are useless, as it's known to be broken." That is rude on purpose. It is supposed to be crystal clear to everyone, that this is not yet for end users, but apparently it is not that clear. The time for end users will come, later. At that time the page will be rewritten to be polite. Right now it is just a cheatsheet for new developers. And once again: The error is not hidden in some library file containing the "GL" in its name, and the versioning of those GL files is also NOT the problem. It's the sources of the nouveau_dri.so file that do contain the bug. True. nouveau_dri.so misses complete features and contains bugs. I read your two first posts as nothing more than an elaborate "Fix everything, please". That really is what people are actually doing on their free time. Trying to kick their butt can only make them ignorant or angry. Yup! Good vibes! a. I do not use parts of the Nvidia blob driver or the blob as whole. b. Up to now I always loaded nouveau_dri.so via AIGLX plus minimal xorg.conf plus nouveau kernel staging driver. c. I can send you some xorg.0.log if you may wish. What other log files could be useful please? d. In fact the xorg server did not crash even once. The only thing that is broken is the specific application (solitaire). There do exist apps that are not broken. That's it for now. If you need further info please tell me. Otherwise I will stay away from Gallium from now on. Cheers Uwe _______________________________________________ Nouveau mailing list Nouv ... @listsfreedesktoporg Roger Pack wrote: Interesting. There are a few projects like ruby2c [1] that have attempted "something like that" I wonder if, given a code base of say a few ruby files that together make up a system, and, operating under the assumption that the code never uses define_method or eval or method_missing, you could convert the whole thing into C :) Has anything similar been invented? There have been several projects that attempt to translate high level languages into C (e.g., the Scheme Chicken compiler). However, I don't know why you would want to do this for Ruby now that 1.9 uses a proper VM. Instead of developing a compiler to target C, why not just target the YARV bytecode? If you are trying to really optimize Ruby, then you'll likely want both static optimizations (generating efficient bytecode, minimizing GC pressure), and dynamic optimizations (hotspot JIT compilation). The latter is especially important for Ruby since you could support for features like eval (just eject any optimizations that are invalidated by the eval'd code and recompile as necessary). In fact, I believe that many of the ideas that went into making the JVM so efficient came out of the Smalltalk community's work on optimizing dynamic VMs. Cheers, -Mike -- Posted via . my account was finally restored to me last evening. On Jul 8, 4:47 pm, Extremely_ worried wrote: it has been well over 24 hours since my account was disabled. I sent in a form yesterday answering all kinds of questions but not precisely. I followed up with e-mails explaining that I do not have the original invitations, or the e-mail from which I received my gmail invitation. This disablement is causing me a lot of inconvenience as I have over 4 years worth of e-receipts, important personal documents, and critical data stored in the account. I am yet to hear back from google. I will keep you all updated. On Jul 7, 6:26 pm, Extremely_ worried wrote: I have submitted this form: ... I have had my account for about 5 years. Naturally, I don't remember very well many of the details that the form asks. for example, i dont remember who invited me to open the account (I guessed at the answer with someone who i am almost certain was the person who invited me, but i could be wrong) I also dont remember the exact date i created my gmail account. i also entered approximate dates of services for 4 google products i have used over the last 5 years. I haven't heard back from google yet. I will keep my fingers crossed. On Jul 7, 3:20 pm, Whit33 © wrote: Once you submit the form it will take few days before you will hear anything from gmail support team. On Jul 7, 2:30 pm, Extremely_ worried wrote: hello Google Team, My gmail account: [email address] was disabled this morning. It was working perfectly fine from home, but when I got to work and tried to log in, I got this error message: "Sorry. This account has been disabled." I have followed the instructions and sent an email to the gmail support staff, but have not received any response yet. I am extremely worried , because this account is very very important to me. I have ALL my personal and critical data uploaded to this account. I am also expecting very important email over the next several hours, and this lockout is causing severe problems for me! Please, please someone on the Google Team, help me resolve this problem! Thank you! Exr- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
