From: Walter Alejandro Iglesias Subject: Re: urvt vs xterm To: Marc Espie Cc: ports@openbsd.org Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 14:21:57 +0200 On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 11:08:29AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 04:13:30PM +0200, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 08:41:46AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 12:39:50AM +0200, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote: > > > > On Tue, 09 Jun 2026 22:09:00 +0200, > > > > Marc Espie wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I've recently started using urxvt instead of xterm everywhere, > > > > > in major part because xterm was losing glyphs, and after a few months > > > > > of not figuring out why (and asking the guys in charge of X11 and drm > > > > > I didn't get any useful answer for my setup) I decided to switch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I not completley understand what do you mean as "losing glyphs" but if you > > > > mean text on resize of screen... > > > > > > No, it's just some glyphs on my xterm that would randomly not show. With > > > absolutely zero error messages and randomness. And it would happen after > > > a while, that could be some random e that would not show. Quite infuriating. > > > > I also don't understand the problem you explain. Some questions: > > > > - Does it happen with unicode only or also with ascii? > > Basic ascii letters. > > > - Does it happen using TrueType or bitmap fonts? > > My xterm resources are as follow: > > XTerm*saveLines: 1500 > *VT100.popOnBell: true > *VT100.colorBD: white > *VT100.colorUL: yellow > XTerm*VT100.backarrowKey: true > *SimpleMenu.background: gray75 > *SimpleMenu.foreground: black > *VT100.background: black > *VT100.foreground: white > *VT100*color12: SteelBlue1 > *VT100*color4: RoyalBlue2 > XTerm*cursorColor: red > *VT100.scrollbar.foreground: cornflowerblue > *VT100.scrollbar.background: gray20 > *VT100.scrollBar: true > *.VT100.faceName: LucidaConsole:rgba=rgb > *.VT100.faceSize: 12.0 > *.VT100.faceSize1: 4.0 > *.VT100.faceSize2: 6.0 > *.VT100.faceSize3: 8.0 > *.VT100.faceSize4: 10.0 > *.VT100.faceSize5: 14.0 > *.VT100.faceSize6: 16.0 > > so this is an xft font. > > > - As TrueType, do you use DejaVu Sans Mono? > Not as far as I know. > > > - Have you tried to reproduce the bug with another window manager? > > I remember many times, occasionally, and this is not recent, to > > notice strange behaviors with xterm in fvwm2, I never stopped to > > investigate why. > > I use fvwm2 from ports because of the xinerama support (dual-screen display) > along with xcompmgr, added when chromium starting doing crap with expose > events, so I don't think that's quite the issue. Not using xcompmgr will probably improve the situation. Using bitmap fonts will also help. > > > - Do you use custom settings in ~/.Xdefaults or ~/.fonts.conf? > Yes, you got my defaults. > > "Lucida Console" comes form 30-lucida-aliases.conf In that file, Lucida Console is aliased to DejaVu Sans Mono. If you're not using a custom ~/.fonts.conf then you're using DejaVu Sans Mono, which is the default (and the less problematic.) > > > - Which graphics do you use? Does it happen with other machines? > > No, it only happens on my home machine. > > inteldrm0 at pci0 dev 2 function 0 "Intel UHD Graphics 630" rev 0x03 > drm0 at inteldrm0 > inteldrm0: msi, COMETLAKE, gen 9 Does this machine use modesetting or falls back to the legacy intel driver? > > The symptom is that after a while of gfx use (lots of mpv running here), > some terminals would randomly lose letters... Some ascii glyphs would > stop rendering, a bit like there was a fixed size memory buffer, and it > would silently overflow without erroring out. > > Opening another xterm would restore normalcy for a bit of time. > > After a day or two, I had to reboot the machine because the problem > would happen quicker and quicker. > > > Never got any idea how to debug it... perfectly silent error, no message > in any log, and couldn't figure out what to set to make it emit actual > errors. > > > Of course, drm would emit all kinds of warning messages, as it does all > the time. Right now, my dmesg is full of > i915_gem_userptr_ioctl: stub > > with apparently zero ill effect. Not an expert here but taking a look to the code, seems that what that message warns is that that function is not been used? On sys/dev/pci/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c:510: if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) { /* * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!) */ #ifdef notyet ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size); if (ret) return ret; #else STUB(); return -ENOSYS; #endif } Someone who really understands about this (not me :-)) might be able to say if this is related to the problem. -- Walter