On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 06:57:27 -0500, Mark Vojkovich wrote: > On Sun, 16 Feb 2003, Guido Guenther wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 05:28:27PM -0500, Mark Vojkovich wrote: > > [..snip..] > > > - Removal of old fullscreen update code (when VT switching) > > > Does that correspond with the breakage? > > Yeah! Especially the above point looks suspicious. I'll see if I can > > check out a version prior to this and see if it works later this week. > > Thanks a lot, > > -- Guido > > Those modifications did: > > static Bool > @@ -206,17 +271,9 @@ ShadowEnterVT(int index, int flags) > { > ScrnInfoPtr pScrn = xf86Screens[index]; > ShadowScreenPtr pPriv = GET_SCREEN_PRIVATE(pScrn->pScreen); > - BoxRec box; > > if((*pPriv->EnterVT)(index, flags)) { > pPriv->vtSema = TRUE; > - > - box.x1 = box.y1 = 0; > - box.x2 = pScrn->pScreen->width; > - box.y2 = pScrn->pScreen->height; > - > - (*pPriv->refresh)(pScrn, 1, &box); > - > return TRUE; > } > > Which appears to prevent the shadowfb code from repainting the > screen when entering the VT. I don't know why that modification was > made. It will clearly leave a messed up screen when switching back. > I've just reproed that on x86. > > Does anyone know why that was removed? It seems erroneous.
>From what I can see... There's a new init routine for ShadowFB - ...Init2() which then doesn't eat the call to EnableDisableFBAccess(), as this produces the expose events rather than repainting. If you call the ShadowFBInit2 in newport_driver.c (just tag FALSE on the end of the arguments). Does that work for you ? Alan. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel