Bug 462431

Thanks for the bug report.  We have reviewed the information you have provided above, and there is some additional information we require that will be helpful in our diagnosis of this issue.

Please attach your X server config file (/etc/X11/xorg.conf) and X server log file (/var/log/Xorg.*.log) to the bug report as individual uncompressed file attachments using the bugzilla file attachment link below.

Could you please also try to run without any /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever and let X11 autodetect your display and video card? Attach to this bug /var/log/Xorg.0.log from this attempt as well, please.

We will review this issue again once you've had a chance to attach this information.

Thanks in advance.

First take a look at the attachment I attached to the report!

Second since when did X cope using 2 monitors without an xorg.conf in F9

Are you saying that the Virtual Display issue has been fixed?

Created attachment 316947 [details]
/etc/X11/xorg.conf

Created attachment 316948 [details]
/var/log/Xorg.0.log

Created attachment 316949 [details]
output of xrandr

Created attachment 316950 [details]
~/.xsession-errors

Matej.

Do developers ( atleast X ) prefer each ( log )
file as an separated attachments instead of 
all files in a single tar ball? 
( Good to know for future reports )

(In reply to comment #7)
> Matej.
> 
> Do developers ( atleast X ) prefer each ( log )
> file as an separated attachments instead of 
> all files in a single tar ball? 
> ( Good to know for future reports )

Yes, we certainly prefer each log to be in its own attachment. Then we can do things like

curl 'https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=316948' \
    | grep -E '^\s*(EE|WW)'

which helps a lot when you have a lot of bugs to deal with.

This is almost certainly a metacity bug.

So I quote Pink Floyd - Comfortably Numb lyric.. 
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB1cNkC71vE )

"Hello.
Is there anybody in there?
Just nod if you can hear me.
Is there anyone home?"

Just checking for status update...

Is this being worked on?

Any further info needed?

This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 9.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '9'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Fedora 9 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-07-10. Fedora 9 is 
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further 
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of 
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.