ubuntu-x-swat team mailing list archive
-
ubuntu-x-swat team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #68755
[Bug 419501] Re: apport-kde assert failure: python: ../../src/xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
> "Both would be bugs in the application."
I would like to point out my test case again (comment 31), a simple
pyGTK app that displays the same problem. While it may have a bug
(please point it out if you see it!), I find that unlikely given how
short and simple it is, and because it works perfectly in Ubuntu <
Karmic. (FWIW, I tried scattering gtk and gobject threads_init() calls
throughout the test case, to no avail.)
As best I can tell from their diffs, python-gasp did not fix this
problem; they worked around it by holding off on importing gtk. I think
this is similar to the work-around in comment 33. From their NEWS file
["* Work around xlib threadinb bug (LP: #41950)"], it seems that they
don't consider this a real bug fix. I don't think that this method will
work in any application that must fork in response to user action.
Thus, it seems to me that the bug is lower than the application level --
it could be in the language bindings (pyGTK, in my case), the toolkit
(GTK), or in X. The only one shared between my test case and apport-kde
is X. But I suppose it is possible that both GTK and QT introduced the
same bug at the same time.
If I may present a hypothesis unfettered by evidence: Perhaps (py)GTK
and (py)QT have long been doing something technically illegal but
practically benign. This went undetected until Karmic, when an upgrade
to libxcb tested for this condition in an assert statement. Obviously,
the correct long-term fix is to find what the toolkits are doing wrong
and fix that, but in the short term it might make sense to relax the
assertion checking in libxcb. The obvious way to test this is to
comment out the assertion, run it, and see if anything breaks. But I
can't even figure out which package has xcb_io.c in it, so I'm probably
not the person to check this.
Anyway, should I reopen bug #518269 and file it against GTK, should this
bug also be linked to GTK, or should I just wait until we have firm
evidence that the problem is at the toolkit level instead of X?
--
apport-kde assert failure: python: ../../src/xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/419501
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to libxcb in ubuntu.