After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 329651 - gparted crashes when choosing a colordepth of 16 bits
gparted crashes when choosing a colordepth of 16 bits
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gparted
Classification: Other
Component: livecd
unspecified
Other All
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: Patrick Verner
gparted maintainers alias
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2006-02-02 18:33 UTC by Plors (Bart H)
Modified: 2006-03-13 03:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Plors (Bart H) 2006-02-02 18:33:45 UTC
Steps to reproduce:
1. boot livecd and choose 16 bits colordepth
2. start gparted



Stack trace:


Other information:
Hi, i filed this bug in the livecd section since i can only reproduce it on the
livecd. I'm already on it and try to fix it in gparted, but i'd like to have
your insights in this matter.

thanks!
Comment 1 Patrick Verner 2006-02-03 03:46:09 UTC
What type of graphics changes did you make from 0.0.9 to 0.1/0.2? I did notice in the new versions your not linking the disk/about/help icons anymore. Xfce for some reason doesn't seem to like them at 8 or 16 depth. 0.0.9 doesn't segfault on livecd-0.2 at 16 btw. It has to be some sort of a simple graphics error, obviously a problem with Xfce, because 0.2 runs on the CD using Fluxbox at any depth.

It's the only thing that comes to mind right now.
Comment 2 cornel panceac 2006-02-03 19:09:41 UTC
( hi patrick ! )

news: i have tried 640x480 and 800x600 and 1024x768 and 1280x1024 and i've found that: on all these modes, choosing 8 bit or 16 bit xolor depth, the gparted segfaults. all the other color depths worked ok.

that suggests you're right with the above comment.
Comment 3 Patrick Verner 2006-02-04 03:49:04 UTC
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4505

check this out...
Comment 4 Plors (Bart H) 2006-02-04 12:54:50 UTC
Well, i know for a fact it's related to the colored pixbufs in the treeview. When i comment them everything works fine.

I didn't have time to investigate any further, but i will as soon as i have time.
Comment 5 Plors (Bart H) 2006-02-04 13:00:41 UTC
that bug at freedesktop looks interesting indeed!
Comment 6 Patrick Verner 2006-02-07 01:12:19 UTC
"colored pixbufs in the treeview"

Can you tell me more about this. I really don't want you to alter Gparted code that works to fix a problem that's only on the cd. It seems really strange that my Slackware system I use everyday has exactly the same deps as the CD and it doesn't segfault. I've spent hours and hours and hours trying to fix this and it seems I've hit a brick wall. What the heck is missing?
Comment 7 Plors (Bart H) 2006-02-07 15:22:44 UTC
Hi Patrick,

sorry for the delay, i've been quite busy with school lately.

I'm not sure what causes this issue, but i'll try to find some time to do the necessary research. It's quite weird we haven't had more reports on this, maybe most people run the livecd using a colordepth of 24 bits and never encounter this issue.
Comment 8 Patrick Verner 2006-02-07 17:02:39 UTC
My worst fears. It's Xvesa not liking 16 or 8 bits with cairo. I tested this last night. The CD works with xorg and slackware fails with xvesa. God this sucks. Most people don't notice because most computers built in the last ten years support 24 bit color. I wonder what types of machines people are having these failers on?
Comment 9 cornel panceac 2006-02-07 18:51:27 UTC
hi patrick
one computer i had these failure is p2/500 with 320 megs ram and: s3 trio 3d/dx video card and an old 14" analog targa monitor. the other computer is barton/1833 (2500+) 512 megs of ram, nvidia fx5200 / 64 megs vram, and acer al 1715.the problem hitted on the first computer although most other tests were done on the second computer. and probably, even the first one can handle 24 bit color depth, but i was tempted to try the "safe" setting, you know :) but one reason wich probably push people to lower resolution/color depth is the gain in speed (of X) on old machines ....
Comment 10 Patrick Verner 2006-02-09 00:01:29 UTC
Plors and I discussed this and decided to drop support for 8 and 16 depth. These are my reasons:

1. I did some research and xvesa at 24 bits is going to run faster than xorg at 16.

2. 99% of monitors and video cards in the Pentium 1 days could run 24 depth.

3. I'm not going back to xorg and bloat the cd to 50mb to support computers this old. Xorg is much slower.

4. GParted is not going to stop using cairo.

5. The CD runs good on a P166 I have at work. It takes longer to boot (duh), but once X started it ran almost as fast as my Intel 865 P4 machine. Reading the off the CD was much slower than anything X was causing.

6. The vast majority of people using this CD would rather have the nicer tree view than the minimal resoure savings (if any human could tell) of 16 depth.

I hope this doesn't make anybody too upset :)
Comment 11 Chris lee 2006-02-09 15:50:33 UTC
Plors and I discussed this and decided to drop support for 8 and 16 depth.
These are my reasons:

>1. I did some research and xvesa at 24 bits is going to run faster than xorg at
>16.
>
>2. 99% of monitors and video cards in the Pentium 1 days could run 24 depth.
>
>3. I'm not going back to xorg and bloat the cd to 50mb to support computers
>this old. Xorg is much slower.
>

Major mistake here. 

You *DON'T* want speed here. YOU WANT SOMETHING THAT WORKS ON WHATEVER 
HARDWARE YOU THROW AT IT.

And quite frankly the version of xvesa you're using just doesn't cut it.

It's basically crap. I don't know where you got it from, but you would better off dumping it and using the Xorg/Xvesa setup from either Puppy Linux or Damn Small Linux instead because they actually work as they should. 

In fact I would recommend the Puppy Linux approach because it lets you choose
which one (Xorg or Xvesa) works best with your harware.





Comment 12 Patrick Verner 2006-02-09 19:40:03 UTC
"And quite frankly the version of xvesa you're using just doesn't cut it.
It's basically crap."

No. I think it's your computer that's crap. Your money has been refunded.
Comment 13 Chris lee 2006-02-10 02:53:27 UTC
Let's see....you've got an crippled X_server on your hands that *CAN'T* support 8 and 16 (and I suspect 24bit) graphics which other distros which use the same X-Server (Puppy and Damn Small) *DO* support without blowing up and you don't think the version you're using isn't screwed up? 
Comment 14 Patrick Verner 2006-02-10 04:25:09 UTC
Let's see....yawn. Like I said before. Your money has been refunded. Go troll someplace else.
Comment 15 Plors (Bart H) 2006-02-10 12:45:55 UTC
please STOP using words like 'crap'!

This is a place for sharing information and knowledge on a proffesional level. Nobody gains anything from shouting at each other like this.

@Chis lee: if you think something could be improved please state so in a polite, respectfull manner. We're not here to do the users bidding and you are always free to choose another livecd.
Comment 16 Patrick Verner 2006-02-10 22:20:47 UTC
Hey, sorry Bart. I was accually trying to be funny. It's this here interweb stuff makes it hard to tell ya all sometimes. Yeehaaa. :)

This issue is closed. Next to nobody is going to care.
Comment 17 Patrick Verner 2006-03-13 03:47:15 UTC
It was cario. 8 and 16 both work without touching X. hmmm

Problem fixed...