<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Paulo Cavalcanti <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:promac@gmail.com">promac@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="Ih2E3d">On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Hans de Goede <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl" target="_blank">j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:<div><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Rahul Sundaram <<a href="mailto:sundaram@fedoraproject.org" target="_blank">sundaram@fedoraproject.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sundaram@fedoraproject.org" target="_blank">sundaram@fedoraproject.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hans de Goede wrote:<br>
<br>
Note I'm looking in to fixing the xzgv thumbnails issue. Why? To<br>
show that actually reporting problems helps I guess.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks Hans. It is amazing, people who knew about the issue would be<br>
not reporting the bug but be willing to build conflicting packages<br>
in another repository.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Please, Rahul<br>
<br>
xzgv does not impact anything. <br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<div>
</div></blockquote></div><div><br>You are good. I thought it would take longer.<br><br> </div><div class="Ih2E3d"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Once more, here is the fixed memtest86+ for F10. It works just fine (for me) even on new Intel G45.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://people.atrpms.net/%7Epcavalcanti/srpms/memtest86+-2.11-3.fc10.src.rpm" target="_blank">http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/memtest86+-2.11-3.fc10.src.rpm</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
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).<br>
<br></blockquote></div><div><br>Here are the differences using Fedora original spec (although the .src.rpm is slightly different):<br><br><a href="http://people.atrpms.net/%7Epcavalcanti/patches/spec.patch" target="_blank">http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/patches/spec.patch</a><br>
<br><a href="http://people.atrpms.net/%7Epcavalcanti/patches/setup.patch" target="_blank">http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/patches/setup.patch</a> <br></div></div><br>The fix is simple, and the grub entry is going to be this way:<br>
<br>
<br>title Memtest86+ v2.11<br> kernel --type=netbsd /memtest86+-2.11<br><br><br>It has been working fine for me, with a lot of different computers,<br>for about two years.<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br><br>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br><br>I would like to add that I always have a /boot partition.<br><br>I never tested it with a different configuration (without /boot, for instance) or<br>using lvm. Maybe nothing does change, but this is why I always avoided to<br>
to get involved, because I do not have how to test all of the configurations.<br><br><br></div></div>-- <br>Paulo Roma Cavalcanti<br>LCG - UFRJ<br>