[mythtv-users] Stupid x-server bug...

[Cory Papenfuss]

 	My initial response is to get offended at referring me to a "how to ask 
questions" response, but in general I agree with what you are saying.  It's 
99.9% of the time a carbon error.  My specific issue is most likely NOT a 
configuration problem, however.  I ran into it before on XFree86 with RH9.  I 
eliminated enough variables to narrow it down to Xv on a r128 driver using 
interlaced modelines.  I posted a message on the xfree86-dev list a few months 
back, received a reponse from someone who confirmed it and they 
supposedly fixed the problem.  Since I had already worked around it by using 
the GATOS driver, I considered the matter solved.

 	Since FC2 is now based on xorg, I suspect that the xfree86 fix was not 
applied.  A problem with *exactly* the same symptoms appeared with the xorg, 
but GATOS doesn't do xorg yet.  I was hoping someone might have a suggestion 
for a hack to fix it.

 	Oh, and it's not as common of a problem as you may think.  It appears 
that most people running mythtv go with either a PVR-350 or NVIDIA for tvout. 
A small subset of others might run ATI on a card with TVOUT.  An even smaller 
subset of people might run ATI vid card to a VGA->Component, or a scanline 
converter.  I suspect there aren't many trying to program the VGA output to 
spit out 480i NTSC frequencies... rather unusual set of circumstances.

-Cory


> I would only like to point you to the link in my signature...
> specifically this section, which I will quote here:
> ----------------------------------
> Don't claim that you have found a bug
>
> When you are having problems with a piece of software, don't claim you
> have found a bug unless you are very, very sure of your ground. Hint:
> unless you can provide a source-code patch that fixes the problem, or
> a regression test against a previous version that demonstrates
> incorrect behavior, you are probably not sure enough.
>
> Remember, there are a lot of other users that are not experiencing
> your problem. Otherwise you would have learned about it while reading
> the documentation and searching the Web (you did do that before
> complaining, didn't you?). This means that very probably it is you who
> are doing something wrong, not the software.
>
> The people who wrote the software work very hard to make it work as
> well as possible. If you claim you have found a bug, you'll be
> implying that they did something wrong, and you will almost always
> offend them — even when you are correct. It's especially undiplomatic
> to yell "bug" in the Subject line.
>
> When asking your question, it is best to write as though you assume
> you are doing something wrong, even if you are privately pretty sure
> you have found an actual bug. If there really is a bug, you will hear
> about it in the answer. Play it so the maintainers will want to
> apologize to you if the bug is real, rather than so that you will owe
> them an apology if you have messed up.
> ----------------------------------
>
> And this section from the FAG of the same link:
> Q: My program doesn't work. I think system facility X is broken.
> A: While it is possible that you are the first person to notice an
> obvious deficiency in system calls and libraries heavily used by
> hundreds or thousands of people, it is rather more likely that you are
> utterly clueless. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence;
> when you make a claim like this one, you must back it up with clear
> and exhaustive documentation of the failure case.
>
> --
> Got a question? http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>