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 556099 - cpufreq-applet sometimes invisible on panel
cpufreq-applet sometimes invisible on panel
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-applets
Classification: Other
Component: cpufreq
2.24.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gnome-applets Maintainers
gnome-applets Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-10-13 07:13 UTC by freggy1
Modified: 2009-01-15 08:58 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.23/2.24


Attachments
Screenshot of "invisible" cpufreq applet (58.88 KB, image/png)
2008-10-13 07:13 UTC, freggy1
Details

Description freggy1 2008-10-13 07:13:16 UTC
Sometimes when I log in in GNOME 2.24 (on Mandriva Linux 2009.0 x86_24), the cpufreq applet is invisible. On the location where it should appear, there is a grey area. If I click on this area, the cpufreq pop-up menu appears normally and also the right click menu works fine. In the applet's preference, I have it set to monitor CPU 0 and the appearance is set to Graphics and Text, with the CPU frequency shown as frequency and showing frequency units.

All other applets (tomboy, notification area, gnome menu, launchers, volume applet, date/time, workspace switcher etc...) are appearing without any problem.
Comment 1 freggy1 2008-10-13 07:13:55 UTC
Created attachment 120490 [details]
Screenshot of "invisible" cpufreq applet
Comment 2 Carlos Garcia Campos 2008-10-13 08:20:34 UTC
Yes, I've noticed it too, but I have no idea why this happens and it's not always reproducible so I'm afraid it's not going to be easy to fix. 

Thanks for reporting. 
Comment 3 Tim Cole 2008-11-11 09:53:30 UTC
This also reproduces in Ubuntu 8.10.

Here is the Ubuntu Launchpad bug for reference:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/267047
Comment 4 Jens Berke 2008-11-12 21:49:20 UTC
I had this bug on a clean new Ubuntu 8.10 install (on two different machines, both dual core with 2 cpufreq applets running, Compiz, transparent panel). However, two days ago an update of gnome-panel and some other GNOME packages were released for Ubuntu, and since then, the situation has improved significantly. On one machine the problem seems to have gone away completely since I installed the updates (before the update, there was always at least one of the two cpufreq applets which was not drawn correctly). Still have to check out the second machine.
Comment 5 Jens Berke 2008-11-14 14:48:04 UTC
Ah sorry. Please ignore my former comment. Seems like I just had luck for two days, when the applet suddenly worked. Now the problem is back again.
Comment 6 Sven 2008-11-18 12:30:33 UTC
As I already mentioned in the related Ubuntu bug report, this does not happen, if you have "None (use system theme)" set as panel background. Or can somebody disagree?
Comment 7 Carlos Garcia Campos 2008-12-15 14:02:42 UTC
I've just committed a few changes to svn trnk that might fix this problem, but I'm not sure because it's hardly ever reproducible for me. Could you guys confirm this is fixed in svn trunk, please?

Thanks. 
Comment 8 eapache 2008-12-21 03:10:43 UTC
I too am affected by this bug (I have a quad-core so at least one of them dies every time I log in :P)

Running Ubuntu Intrepid, 64-bit

Carlos, I will test it, but I probably won't have time until after Christmas.
Comment 9 eapache 2008-12-21 03:31:27 UTC
I checked out a copy, and tried to compile it, but automake (I assume that's what I'm supposed to use given the Makefile.am) keeps telling me:

automake: `configure.ac' or `configure.in' is required

I've never used automake before, and a quick google doesn't turn up any useful results. Can somebody tell me what I'm missing?

(So much for after Christmas :)
Comment 10 Carlos Garcia Campos 2008-12-31 11:49:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> I checked out a copy, and tried to compile it, but automake (I assume that's
> what I'm supposed to use given the Makefile.am) keeps telling me:

Great, thanks :-)
 
> automake: `configure.ac' or `configure.in' is required
> 
> I've never used automake before, and a quick google doesn't turn up any useful
> results. Can somebody tell me what I'm missing?
>

try with:

$ ./autogen.sh
$ make

or take a look at jhbuild (http://live.gnome.org/Jhbuild). 


Comment 11 eapache 2008-12-31 15:23:18 UTC
(In reply to comment #10)
> try with:
> 
> $ ./autogen.sh
> $ make

There is no autogen.sh in gnome-applets/trunk/cpufreq/ only in gnome-applets/trunk/

Does this mean I can't rebuild only the cpufreq applet but need to rebuild all of the applets together?
Comment 12 Carlos Garcia Campos 2008-12-31 15:34:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> Does this mean I can't rebuild only the cpufreq applet but need to rebuild all
> of the applets together?
> 

Well, you can run autogen.sh and then make under cpufreq
Comment 13 eapache 2008-12-31 16:38:20 UTC
Successfully built and installed ('about' now shows 2.25.2).

I rebooted once after the install, and all four loaded properly. That happens sometimes anyways, so I wouldn't call it conclusive, but still a good sign.

I'll let you know in a few days how they're working.
Comment 14 eapache 2009-01-05 21:44:52 UTC
It's working fine. This can be marked fixed.
Comment 15 freggy1 2009-01-05 22:01:31 UTC
Is it possible to apply the fix to the 2.24 branch?
Comment 16 Callum McKenzie 2009-01-06 05:51:20 UTC
Backporting to 2.24 would be pointless since there are no more scheduled releases. Marking as fixed.
Comment 17 freggy1 2009-01-06 10:35:27 UTC
According to http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentyfive/
Jan 12: GNOME 2.24.3 Stable tarballs due

Seems like a good reason to me to apply this to 2.24 branch. 
Comment 18 Callum McKenzie 2009-01-07 00:33:45 UTC
Sorry, my mistake.

Carlos: do we have a clear idea about which of the recent updates cured the problem? Most of the changes look fairly harmless, is it safe to apply the lot?
Comment 19 Callum McKenzie 2009-01-13 08:36:08 UTC
I've backported all the changes that seem appropriate from trunk to the 2.24 branch.
Comment 20 Carlos Garcia Campos 2009-01-15 08:58:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #18)

> Carlos: do we have a clear idea about which of the recent updates cured the
> problem? Most of the changes look fairly harmless, is it safe to apply the lot?
>

hey Callum, sorry for not replying before but I was on vacation. Thanks  for backporting the patches.