Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: system-config-display wouldn't start The report in terminal is: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/system-config-display/xconf.py", line 312, in <module> hardware_state = XF86HardwareState(xconfig) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 174, in __init__ self.init_from_xconfig(xconfig) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 260, in init_from_xconfig if screen.device: AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'device' Expected results: Additional info:
Confirming, I have the same error as above.
ok system-config-display-1.1.1-1.fc10.noarch kernel-2.6.27.12-170.2.5.fc10.x86_64
I have the same problem. I'll add that I've installed the livna nvidia drivers. I am not sure if that is part of the problem, as I never tested system-config-display without those drivers.
What version of rhpxl are you seeing this with?
rhpxl - 1.9-3.fc10(x86_64)
hi, I have the same problem.On running s-c-d from terminal this is what i get. [root@Ankur ~]# system-config-display Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/system-config-display/xconf.py", line 312, in <module> hardware_state = XF86HardwareState(xconfig) File "/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 174, in __init__ self.init_from_xconfig(xconfig) File "/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 260, in init_from_xconfig if screen.device: AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'device' I have livna-config-display installed (because of kmod-nvidia from rpmfusion?) Please request any further info you need.
michael , Could you please confirm that you're still seeing the bug and run rpm -q rhpxl on your system and report the version ? Thank you
rhpxl-1.9-3.fc10.i386 The bug is still there
in rawhide $ rpm -q system-config-display rhpxl system-config-display-1.1.3-1.fc11.noarch rhpxl-1.12-1.fc11.x86_64 $ system-config-display Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/system-config-display/xconf.py", line 376, in <module> dialog = xConfigDialog.XConfigDialog(hardware_state, xconfig, rhpxl.videocard.VideoCardInfo()) File "/usr/share/system-config-display/xConfigDialog.py", line 641, in __init__ if len(self.xconfig.layout[0].adjacencies) >
I can confirm this too: $ rpm -qa rhpxl system-config-display rhpxl-1.9-3.fc10.i386 system-config-display-1.1.1-1.fc10.noarch $ sudo system-config-display Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/system-config-display/xconf.py", line 312, in <module> hardware_state = XF86HardwareState(xconfig) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 174, in __init__ self.init_from_xconfig(xconfig) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/rhpxl/xhwstate.py", line 260, in init_from_xconfig if screen.device: AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'device'
*** Bug 477993 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I have the same problem too. I'm using Fedora 11 beta, my rhpxl version is rhpxl-1.12-2.fc11.x86_64
After a full yum update on Fedora 10, I am having the very same problem reported by this bug. What makes this bug so annoying is that I am running FC10 under virtualbox. The default display size of the screen is tiny!!! I am unable to expandit, enlarge it or re-config it. F11 is about to be released, and there is still no fix for this bug in F10!!! Well, I guess Fedora is permanently experimental :)
For me everything worked fine, until I updated to rhpxl-1.9-3.fc10.
same error as in #9
the bug is still here in Fedora 11.
I have Fedora 11 - Installed it a few months ago. There is no longer /usr/bin/system-config-display It simply does not exist in my installation. There does exist /usr/bin/gnome-display-properties which does not have the same controls as system-config-display used to have. I guess this might be the new way of how do deal with a bug report: delete the buggy program altogether :) The question is who deleted it from the FC11 distro: the gnome project or the xorg project?? Not sure who was the original creator/disseminator of it.
(In reply to comment #17) > I have Fedora 11 - Installed it a few months ago. > There is no longer /usr/bin/system-config-display > > It simply does not exist in my installation. > > There does exist /usr/bin/gnome-display-properties > > which does not have the same controls as system-config-display > used to have. > > I guess this might be the new way of how do deal with a bug report: > delete the buggy program altogether :) > > The question is who deleted it from the FC11 distro: > the gnome project or the xorg project?? > Not sure who was the original creator/disseminator of it. For some reason, it was not installed on my installation, even though I had leterally selected every single package on the DVD (via the insallation menus). So, my above comments are clearly wrong. I installed it manually: system-config-display.noarch 0:1.1.3-2.fc11 rhpxl.i586 0:1.12-2.fc11 and it is working just fine. No problems here. Again, sorry for my previous comment.
(In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #17) > > I have Fedora 11 - Installed it a few months ago. > > There is no longer /usr/bin/system-config-display > > > > It simply does not exist in my installation. > > > > There does exist /usr/bin/gnome-display-properties > > > > which does not have the same controls as system-config-display > > used to have. > > > > I guess this might be the new way of how do deal with a bug report: > > delete the buggy program altogether :) > > > > The question is who deleted it from the FC11 distro: > > the gnome project or the xorg project?? > > Not sure who was the original creator/disseminator of it. > > For some reason, it was not installed on my installation, even though > I had leterally selected every single package on the DVD (via the insallation > menus). > > So, my above comments are clearly wrong. > > I installed it manually: > system-config-display.noarch 0:1.1.3-2.fc11 > rhpxl.i586 0:1.12-2.fc11 > > and it is working just fine. No problems here. > > Again, sorry for my previous comment. I revisted the installation DVD for FC11: $ pwd /media/Fedora 11 i386 DVD/Packages $ ls -l *system-config-display* /bin/ls: cannot access *system-config-display*: No such file or directory $ So, for some reason it was ommitted from the installation ISO.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 10 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 10. 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 '10'. 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 10'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 10 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 10 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-12-17. Fedora 10 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.