Re: R: [XFree86] console switching broken on TinyX?

[Doug McNutt]

At 15:32 +0200 4/22/05, Amedeo Gargiulo wrote:
>Could you explain how can I sue TinyX, instead of XFre86.
>Amedeo from Italy

It's good that you're an Italian.

The u <=> s swap  makes you sound entirely too American.
-- 

--> From the U S of A, the only socialist country that refuses to admit it. <--
___
XFree86 mailing list
XFree86@XFree86.Org
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86

Re: [XFree86] Odd Screen Overlap

[Doug McNutt]

At 10:40 -0500 2/14/05, Carl F. Hall wrote:
> I have an overlap at the bottom of the screen that is a copy of the first 
> 10-15 pixels of the top of the screen.  I'm running at 1280x1024.  When I 
> switch to 1024x768, the problem doesn't show.  I've tried adjusting the 
> monitor but there are useful things, namely the status bar, behind that 
> overlap.

Sounds like a typical hardware problem. The internal adjustment in your monitor 
is probably called vertical phase. The monitor is failing to synch tightly to 
the vertical synch pulses form the video card when the rate is pushed too high. 
If you're lucky it's just an internal adjustment but it's more-often due to 
change in value of a capacitor on the printed circuit board. I doubt that those 
pixels are actually copies but if they are I'm all wrong. The video card would 
have to be thoroughly messed up to send some pixels twice.

It's extremely rare for that kind of problem to originate in a video card.

-- 
-->  There are 10 kinds of people:  those who understand binary, and those who 
don't <--
___
XFree86 mailing list
XFree86@XFree86.Org
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86

Re: [XFree86] Monitor Display problem and xserver into starting

[Doug McNutt]

At 15:22 +0100 8/14/04, sudha sudhakar wrote:
>I tried to change the resolution of my monitor
>previously it was 640 x 480
>I changed to 1024 x 860

Surely xfree86 is tolerant of simple things like that (isn't it?) but your monitor at 
640 x 480 has a 4:3 ratio. If you go to 1024 across the corresponding vertical should 
be 768.

-- 
-->  There are 10 kinds of people:  those who understand binary, and those who don't 
<--
___
XFree86 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86

Re: [XFree86] e-mails

[Doug McNutt]

Chris probably needs to pay attention to the headers on his e-mail if he doesn't want 
to help with other people's problems.

List-Unsubscribe: ,



but. . .

I have 60 confirmed SPAM mails in April that arrived with a headers that accurately 
match the headers associated with this list. Subject lines include the [XFree86] tag.

I don't know if its possible to fake stuff that well. But those guys get better every 
day. The first Received From: header is difficult to fake and there are differences:

SPAM
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from authicp1.giga.net.tw ([203.133.1.106]) by  ; Sun, 18 Apr 2004 08:37:28 
-0500

REAL
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from public.xfree86.org ([204.152.184.208]) by  ; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 12:40:52 
-0500

Is it just me, or does it affect everyone else?

At 18:10 +0100 4/25/04, ChrisTurner wrote:
>I am receiving hundreds of e-mails regarding XFree86
>I only asked fror help on one question but am being swamped with other peoples 
>questions
> 
>Please remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from any mailing lists you 
>have
>chris Turner


-- 
-->  There are 10 kinds of people:  those who understand binary, and those who don't 
<--
___
XFree86 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86