On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:25:33AM -0800, Tom Williams wrote: >David Dawes wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:53:41AM -0800, Tom Williams wrote: >> >>> David Dawes wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:54:02PM -0500, David Dawes wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:23:17AM -0800, Tom Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi! I just installed the XFree86 4.5.99.901 snapshot (which fixed my >>>>>> xterm installation problem, thanks guys! :)) and it runs fine. I >>>>>> wanted to try the "-autoconfig" option to see what it would do and it >>>>>> generated these messages: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Autoconfigure works by loading a bunch of drivers, using the one >>>>> that proves to be the best choice, and unloading the others. >>>>> >>>>> The problem is that fbdev registers that it needs fbdevhw. When >>>>> it is unloaded it doesn't notify the loader that fbdevhw is no >>>>> longer needed. Since the nv driver refers to fbdevhw (even though >>>>> it isn't using it), these references are being reported as fatal >>>>> unresolved symbols. >>>>> >>>>> The new loader now invalidates symbol references to modules that >>>>> have been unloaded. To fix this problem, the fbdev module (and all >>>>> modules, really) needs to be modified to register its fbdevhw >>>>> requirements as being specific to itself so that those requirements >>>>> get removed when it is unloaded. >>>>> >>>>> I'll take a look at doing this, and post a patch. >>>>> >>>>> Tom, thanks for reporting the problem! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The attached patch should fix this problem. >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>> Yep, that patch worked. *Both* "-autoconfig" and "-configure" work just >>> fine. :) >>> >> >> I've just committed some changes that improve the handling of module >> requirements, and have modified all modules to make use of this. Along >> the way I found several bugs that showed up as a result of this and of >> the fact that modules can now be unloaded and reloaded cleanly. I >> have also removed some workarounds for the old loader (mis)behaviour, >> and plan to remove some more after further testing. >> >> I expect that there will be more problems showing up that either were >> masked in the past, or come from code that relied on the old loader >> behaviour. Please report problems and/or new warnings/errors in the log >> file here and I'll follow them up. >> >> David >Sounds good! Are you aware of this issue I posted about a few days ago: > >http://www.mail-archive.com/xfree86@xxxxxxxxxxx/msg20133.html I haven't been able to reproduce this. It might be specific to the driver/hardware. Is it something that you can reproduce reliably? David _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
