Summary: | After installing libXrandr 1.2.0-r1 running xrandr -v reports version 1.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Hal Engel <hvengel> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers> |
Status: | VERIFIED INVALID | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2006.0 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Hal Engel
2007-03-01 01:10:05 UTC
Uh; x11-libs/libXrandr != x11-apps/xrandr $ equery b `which xrandr` [ Searching for file(s) /usr/bin/xrandr in *... ] x11-apps/xrandr-1.2.0 (/usr/bin/xrandr) I guess I should have been more clear. I have libXrandr 1.2.0-r1 installed along with xrandr 1.2.0. When I said I was trying to get the gamma stuff to work I should have said the gamma stuff in libxrandr since my c test code was calling XRRGetCrtcGamma and XRRGetCrtcGammaSize and failing on both calls. I have since found out that the reason that these calls are failing is that the nvidia driver does not yet support these calls. In any case this bug report is about the emerge of libXrandr and a revdep-rebuild failing to build everything needed to correctly install libXrandr 1.2.x. This bug just plain doesn't make sense. revdep-rebuild is for fixing broken linkage, nothing else. xrandr binary is not installed by libXrandr either. Closed. I am not having a problem with xrandr. And I didn't say it was installed by libXrandr. The reason I mentioned xrandr is that running xrandr -v AFTER emerging libXrandr 1.2.0-r1 and xrandr 1.2.0 results in the reported version of RandR used by the "server" beging 1.1 and not 1.2. In order to get xrandr -v to report the correct installed version of libXrandr I had to re-emerge xorg-server. In other words the libXrandr upgrade is NOT complete until xorg-server is re-emerged (is that not a a broken linkage?). Shouldn't there at least be a warning issued by the ebuild that this is the case? Thats all that I would like to have happen. Again I should have been clearer in my writing. Sorry to cause so much confusion. |