Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Seth Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001212 16:39]: [...] and Utah's has some advantages for some people. And the one person who has seemed to be effected thus far did not take the time and effort to put his packages on hold. :-P Why should he? Package: libutahglx1 Replaces: libgl1 Provides: libgl1 Depends: libc6 (= 2.1.2), xlib6g (= 3.3.6-4) Recommends: utah-glx Package: utah-glx Depends: xserver, libc6 (= 2.1.2) Recommends: libutahglx1 Conflicts: xfree86-common(=4.0) Package: xfree86-common Suggests: xserver-xfree86 | xserver apt found a solution for the upgrade, and given the information above it probably meant deinstalling xserver-svga in favour of xserver-xfree86. This is probably a bug in utah-glx. But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. -- Marcelo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
* Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 00:21]: But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. Using the -u flag with apt would have saved him as much as using = in dselect. -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
John, I am going to guess at what you are trying to say; cutting and
pasting error messages, complete with examples of what you are trying to
execture (say, how script(1) would perform) would help immensely,
particularly with this description.
There, that said, my guess says you are trying to run clients connecting
to X using standard TCP sockets. /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc has a bit
-nolisten tcp that turns off listening to tcp sockets. This is a Good
Thing.
If you cannot use ssh(1) to forward your X connections, you could remove
the -nolisten tcp, but be aware that you will be much less secure in the
process. Consider, and reconsider, using ssh(1) for that. (Check the
debian-x archives for the last day or so for an email from me regarding
something very similar. A hint: Debian has turned off the automatic ssh
X forwarding for security reasons, but as long as you trust both hosts,
there is nothing to worry about.)
HTH
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 02:10]:
- Forwarded message from John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Xfree broken
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:51:33 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
Branden:
Sorry to bother you so soon after my last question, but here goes:
cant connect user not authorized
other hosts cannot send clients. Xterm from a previously happy system
can no
longer send anything.
My dependance on X has become obvious, nothing else works.
If you have time, thanks
- End forwarded message -
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux |Exercise your freedom of religion. Set
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |fire to a church of your choice.
http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all
really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the potato backported packages
Charl, certain dumb people are starting to use the Debian BTS to file bugs against the potato backport packages. Even *if* my current packages are building fine out of the box on potato systems right now, there's no guarantee that will continue to be the case and I cannot support them. Please modify your packages to inform people not to use the Debian BTS. Perhaps a patch to modify xc/config/cf/linux.cf to set BuilderEmailAddr to "UNSUPPORTED, UNOFFICIAL DEBIAN PACKAGES -- DO NOT FILE BUGS" would work? Thanks for providing them, though. My problem is with ignorant users, not you. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | The software said it required Windows [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 3.1 or better, so I installed Linux. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | PGP signature
[stupid question warning] kernel atyfb XF86 4.0 ati driver ?
Did anybody here ever (succesfully) try to get the combination of the atyfb driver and the XFree86 4.0.x ati driver to work properly ? I'm using the lastest (-11) packages and the most current kernel (2.4.0-test12) on an2 year old laptop with an Mach64 Rage Pro LT chipset. The xserver comes up just fine, it detects the hardware properly as far as I can see however somtimes the drawing routines seem not to work which results in some (but not all !) missing or distorted buttons and menus etc. I'd prefer to continue using the atyfb instead of the vesafb on the kernel side since it makes things like scrolling on the console so much faster. If somebody wants to take a look at the startup log and config files I can mail them directly, I just don't want to burden all reading the list with it. Cheers Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [stupid question warning] kernel atyfb XF86 4.0 ati driver ?
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 12:37:13PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did anybody here ever (succesfully) try to get the combination of the atyfb driver and the XFree86 4.0.x ati driver to work properly ? Yup, here! Working fine on two machines with RagePro. On the console I have some problems with scrolling text, ie less does not work very well but more does, but under X everything is fine. This is with 2.2.18 however, I did not test 2.4.x much yet. Christian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Seth Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 00:21]: But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. Using the -u flag with apt would have saved him as much as using = in dselect. You are missing the point. His problems as a side issue. Problems with unstable are to be expected. The question is if there's a bug with xf4/xf3.3/utah-glx packages in woody. You seem to forget this is not a user's list. -- Marcelo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tracking XFree86 CVS on a Potato system
Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: The issue is that I want to *litterally* track XFree86 CVS. I want to be able to say ``cvs diff'' when I'm working on XFree86. Who doesn't? :) Unless someone has better ideas, then, I guess I'll install Charl's packages and then overwrite them with my own binaries (compiled from a checked out CVS source tree). Sorry if I'm missing anything, but why not do something like this (it's what I've been using for some time now): Define ProjectRoot to something other than /usr/X11R6 in your CVS tree's host.def . That way you can have one or even several local X installations. Or you can even run directly out of the CVS tree by setting the ModulePath accordingly. Of course you still need to have the X packages installed to keep dpkg and friends happy. Hope this suggestion is valuable, Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and The DRI Project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
[Error messages from John] [Branden -- will the Xwrapper.config 'console' or 'root' option prevent client connections from other hosts? Or does this effect only who can run X locally, as I hope it does? :] Bummer about not being able to use ssh. (Though I am surprised the firewall would let X connections work, but not ssh! If I had to firewall only one, I would have chosen differently. :) I also fear I wasn't clear in my previous email -- remove the whole '-nolisten tcp' bit, including the 'tcp'. You will either need to figure out how the MIT magic cookies work, or use the xhost +host options (or xauth, which I think is the magic cookies) to enable the connections from elsewhere. HTH. :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 10:08]: Seth : Xlib: connection to ":0.0" refused by server Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server Application initialization failed: couldn't connect to display ":0.0" - and - Can't open display "blah:0.0" Sorry for the lack of error messages, just too much in a hurry. I DID remove -nolisten from /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc, it now reads: exec X -dpi 100 tcp I have clients that cannot use ssh on this network. I am behind a firewall. and still no connect... Oh, well. Thanks for your time. -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
John, I *think* xhost needs to be used more like: xhost +blah -- no space. ObQuestion: Have you restarted X since removing the -nolisten tcp bit? :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 14:43]: Seth: Oops, I am unclear again: I did use "xhost + blah", and it still refuses. Also removed '-nolisten tcp'. I am rsh'ing from an old AIX box, do I need to add an ssh client to it? I don't really have access to the box aside from my few clients. The systems that are interacting are all on the same side as the Firewall. Having 'tcp' on /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc line seemed to cause no problem. Alas, it still is offline. I'm sure it will be some small configuration problem. It might be an imcompatability of R4 or something. Once this is working I will look into MIT Magic X cookies. Thanks again. Arnold wrote: [Error messages from John] [Branden -- will the Xwrapper.config 'console' or 'root' option prevent client connections from other hosts? Or does this effect only who can run X locally, as I hope it does? :] Bummer about not being able to use ssh. (Though I am surprised the firewall would let X connections work, but not ssh! If I had to firewall only one, I would have chosen differently. :) I also fear I wasn't clear in my previous email -- remove the whole '-nolisten tcp' bit, including the 'tcp'. You will either need to figure out how the MIT magic cookies work, or use the xhost +host options (or xauth, which I think is the magic cookies) to enable the connections from elsewhere. HTH. :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 10:08]: Seth : Xlib: connection to ":0.0" refused by server Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server Application initialization failed: couldn't connect to display ":0.0" - and - Can't open display "blah:0.0" Sorry for the lack of error messages, just too much in a hurry. I DID remove -nolisten from /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc, it now reads: exec X -dpi 100 tcp I have clients that cannot use ssh on this network. I am behind a firewall. and still no connect... Oh, well. Thanks for your time. -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late. Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Christian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: * Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) I've been looking for an m68k emu capable of running Linux under my g4. If you know of one, I'de be very interested (with respect to getting glibc compiled done). Doesn't matter if it requires MacOS either, so long as it emulates a 68040 and runs Linux. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
Ben Collins wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: * Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) I've been looking for an m68k emu capable of running Linux under my g4. If you know of one, I'de be very interested (with respect to getting glibc compiled done). Doesn't matter if it requires MacOS either, so long as it emulates a 68040 and runs Linux. Looked at UAE yet? Don't know if that emulates an 68040... Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and The DRI Project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: -11 gives graphics corruption with V3 3000
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:47:17PM -0500, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 10:39:55PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: xserver-xfree86-11 gives corruption on my V3 3000. Black bars run across the top of the screen, and moving windows causes corruption. I'm running at 1792x1344 using DRI. Dropping back to the xserver-10 package (and keeping the -11 ones for everything else) fixed things. Does -11 have a new upstream version? Errr, it actually WORKS at 1792x1344? *grumble* Yup, but only at 16bit. Increasing the resolution or trying 24bit gives corruption. Try it at 1024x768, it may be the same bug, or a different one. Ok, I'll give -11 a shot with lower resolution in the morning. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pooh@lava.cs.tu-berlin.de: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11]
I can't really follow this one. - Forwarded message from Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:46:17 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany Dear Branden, I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm a little confused with the package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 which I recently installed to my computer. Obviously, it contains the Server XFree86-3.3.6 and not 4.0.1 as the package name suggested. That's a pity, because I just changed from a self-compiled XServer back to good old Debian packages, but as you can imagine, the old XServer won't accept my configuration and my video card. Is this a bug or a feature? ;-) Bye, René -- Dipl.-Inform. René Tschirley, http://cg.cs.tu-berlin.de/~pooh TU Berlin, Computer Graphics and Computer Assisted Medicine research group - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| One man's theology is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | belly laugh. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Heinlein http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | PGP signature
[dwarf@polaris.net: Problem with X after upgrade to potato]
- Forwarded message from Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problem with X after upgrade to potato Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:55:39 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: dwarf@dwarf In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0012131038100.32465-10@dwarf If you noticed my clumsy postings about my potato upgrade, you will understand that I have only recently gotten apt-get to do a complete potato upgrade. As a result, I am recieving a new behavior from X that is a real bummer. When working in X, I am often switching back to a console VC, and then returning back to the X VC when done at the console. After the upgrade, often, but not always, switching back to the X server's VC will cause the server to restart. It doesn't always happen, but it happens often enough to make doing honest work very difficult. (restarting mozilla is a real yawn) Now, from what little I understand of X, this could be a problem with xdm, the xserver itself, the window manager, or possibly even a kernel interaction over VC switching signals. I haven't the foggiest idea where to look, or how to approach this problem. I can give you some gut instincts, based on this machines past performances with X. I suspect there is some kind of hardware glitch in my graphics card, but I don't have the resources to swap for another. (poverty sucks) In the past (I've owned this machine for almost 4 years now), I've had a different problem with X. On very rare occasions, clicking the mouse would cause a section of the screen to go to garbage (like static on the TV) in a small band around the mouse pointer. Each successive click made the screen uglier, however, the functions still worked well enought to log xdm out and restart the server. It would always come back up clean. (my C experience suggests a misplaced pointer, writing mouse data over screen memory, but it could be many other things as well) I don't know if this is related, but, the gpm server, on rare occasions goes belly up, and the only way I can fix it is to re-install gpm. This also suggests hardware flakeyness, but could just as easily be the result of a race condition within gpm. What I wish, is that I could afford that neat new IBM machine with the flat screen and the machine built into the screen base, but I don't have the 4 grand... Any suggestions on my X problem would be greatfully appreciated. Thanks, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_- - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|Measure with micrometer, Debian GNU/Linux |mark with chalk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] |cut with axe, http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |hope like hell. PGP signature
Re: [dwarf@polaris.net: Problem with X after upgrade to potato]
[No need to mail Branden directly; debian-user or debian-x are probably the better forums anyway.] * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 20:46]: - Forwarded message from Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] - When working in X, I am often switching back to a console VC, and then returning back to the X VC when done at the console. After the upgrade, often, but not always, switching back to the X server's VC will cause the server to restart. It doesn't always happen, but it happens often enough to make doing honest work very difficult. (restarting mozilla is a real yawn) Dale, I had this same problem myself, with pre-release versions of Branden's .debs. (The -phase1 and -phase2 releases.) I wrote a message off to matrox, they wrote back some obvious things, but nothing helped. Sadly, I don't recall if the problem went away when I upgraded the matrox-supplied mga_drv.o driver, or at some point when Branden updated the CVS he was tracking. :( It might not hurt to comment out the GLX/DRI stuff in your XF86Config-4 file, if you don't need them. It isn't perfect. :) HTH -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:58:18PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: [Error messages from John] [Branden -- will the Xwrapper.config 'console' or 'root' option prevent client connections from other hosts? Or does this effect only who can run X locally, as I hope it does? :] The latter. The X wrapper is a setuid program that simply tries to enforce a permissions mechanism on the literal execution of the X server program itself. It therefore has no impact on client connections whatsoever. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux|If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws [EMAIL PROTECTED] |will @goH7OjBd7*dnfk=q4fDj]Kz?. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | PGP signature
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 07:25:23PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: * Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) I've been looking for an m68k emu capable of running Linux under my g4. If you know of one, I'de be very interested (with respect to getting glibc compiled done). Doesn't matter if it requires MacOS either, so long as it emulates a 68040 and runs Linux. Let me know if this works out, and I will babysit XFree86 builds for m68k myself, using the recently-donated G3. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux| The software said it required Windows [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 3.1 or better, so I installed Linux. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | PGP signature
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 12:28:54AM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote: Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late. Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Here it comes where? There was no MIME-attachment. -- G. Branden Robinson |Software engineering: that part of Debian GNU/Linux|computer science which is too difficult [EMAIL PROTECTED] |for the computer scientist. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | PGP signature
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 22:43]: Let me know if this works out, and I will babysit XFree86 builds for m68k myself, using the recently-donated G3. Well, I wasn't thinking of emulating one of those old machines -- I was thinking of setting up gcc to know about the processor on one machine while compiling on another. You know, using the -b flag? -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Utah GLX
Seth Arnold wrote: Perhaps it is cutting out users who join the project with woody's original release. You don't fall into this category. You *can* install 3.3.6-11potato18 though, which is probably pretty damn close to the 3.3.6-18 you miss so much. I feel like after giving a 'head's up' on my concern over utah and the X roadmap, that I shouldn't have to worry about deps going so far as to choose my X version. Some of this relates to some of the main things I have critized debian for since I started using it a few years back. When I brought up concerns, I was dismissed. When I asked why I was dissmissed, I was told the old stand by it's not supposed to work. Also the mentality that I *should have to repair the packages and shouldn't trust the packagers judgement. It is very infuriating over time... I can't believe that I should put all these packages I'm assumed to have on hold so often either. Eh? Hmm. Maybe you forgot a 'not' somewhere in this sentence. Could you please rephrase that, and more directly apply it to your case of not putting the 3.3.6 packages on hold? What I was saying is that some commerial applications in linux require utah. cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgghttp://gooseegg.sourceforge.net | | QuakeForge http://www.quakeforge.net | | Personalhttp://www.westga.edu/~stu7440| | | | Death is running Debian GNU/Linux| ---
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: As the gtkglarea maintainer (and since you hinted it's the OpenGL subsystem what broke) I feel this is somehow my fault... could you please elaborate on this? It seems to be that gtk depends on X 4.0.1+, and that caused my working xserver to be purged and replaced. Still, I want to be able to use 3.3.6-18 and utah packages for G400 and G200 - and they're not in woody anymore. My gripe is that I can't do a new install of 3.3 and utah on any machine, or even ( by using debian ) replace the xserver and libs I lost. cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgghttp://gooseegg.sourceforge.net | | QuakeForge http://www.quakeforge.net | | Personalhttp://www.westga.edu/~stu7440| | | | Death is running Debian GNU/Linux| ---
Re: 4.0.1-11 breaks text and images on SiS 86C326
Weird. I just upgraded to -11 and when xdm starts, the login widget shows
up as a blank box. Even weirder, switching to a text console and back
suddenly brings the text back! (Except that it cleared the background to
white in the process) Everything seems to work OK now, but earlier on, on
my first attempt to restart X, the X server crashed after I logged in.
Yup, that is the bug that I'm seeing.
I haven't tried switching to text mode and back: but I just found out
that changing resolutions and changing back (e.g. CTRL-ALT-{+,-}) also
works.
It seems that some kind of video initialization is not being called
when the server first starts.
-BenRI
--
q
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Seth Arnold wrote: Compared against Utah, at least the last time I looked at it, this is really pretty quick and easy. Whether or not the features supported by Utah are imporant enough to justify the work involved with getting it to go is entirely dependent upon the applications one needs to run. For me, I never missed the features. For mongoose (terry?), he obviously misses the features of Utah, but not enough to ensure they wouldn't be overwritten. So, it is your stance that you will not support cards without DRI drivers - and only support 3d cards by their DRI drivers only? People shouldn't be artificial limited like that from my view. If this was about quick and easy and using drivers that weren't fully functional, then I could be running NT. This is about a policy change that wasn't well thought. Some people will need utah for some time, and not allowing new installs of xservers to support utah seems to artifically impose huge hurtles for users and shops alike. cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgghttp://gooseegg.sourceforge.net | | QuakeForge http://www.quakeforge.net | | Personalhttp://www.westga.edu/~stu7440| | | | Death is running Debian GNU/Linux| ---
Re: [bruce@perens.com: user not authorized to run the X server]
Gordon Sadler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: However, my issue is not HOW to fix it, but rather after fixing it it does not stay fixed. Every upgrade requires me to again dpkg- reconfigure xserver-common. That was the thought behind my bug, maybe Branden doesn't quite realize what I meant. He said this is now the proper way to act for xserver. Maybe he isn't aware it needs to be reconfigured EVERY time? Actually I was just about to file this bug, but couldn't reproduce it. IIRC I've been asked about this three or four times now during upgrades. -- Marcelo
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Seth Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001212 16:39]: [...] and Utah's has some advantages for some people. And the one person who has seemed to be effected thus far did not take the time and effort to put his packages on hold. :-P Why should he? Package: libutahglx1 Replaces: libgl1 Provides: libgl1 Depends: libc6 (= 2.1.2), xlib6g (= 3.3.6-4) Recommends: utah-glx Package: utah-glx Depends: xserver, libc6 (= 2.1.2) Recommends: libutahglx1 Conflicts: xfree86-common(=4.0) Package: xfree86-common Suggests: xserver-xfree86 | xserver apt found a solution for the upgrade, and given the information above it probably meant deinstalling xserver-svga in favour of xserver-xfree86. This is probably a bug in utah-glx. But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. -- Marcelo
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
[Don't Cc me, I'm on the list] Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems to be that gtk depends on X 4.0.1+, and that caused my working xserver to be purged and replaced. Still, I want to be able to use 3.3.6-18 and utah packages for G400 and G200 - and they're not in woody anymore. My gripe is that I can't do a new install of 3.3 and utah on any machine, or even ( by using debian ) replace the xserver and libs I lost. You might want to look in /var/backups/dpkg.status.* in order to figure out what pulled the new X server in. Most people complain because this doesn't happen automatically. My first guess would be task-x-window-system-core. At any rate, it can't be libgtk1.2 itself. You might want to take this with the utah-glx maintainer, because it seems it's not possible to install utah-glx on woody right now: ysabell:/home/marcelo# apt-get install utah-glx Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that the package is simply not installable and a bug report against that package should be filed. The following information may help to resolve the situation: Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: utah-glx: Depends: xserver E: Sorry, broken packages xlibs is a different issue. The short version: that's ok. HTH, -- Marcelo
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
* Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 00:21]: But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. Using the -u flag with apt would have saved him as much as using = in dselect. -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
[jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
- Forwarded message from John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Xfree broken
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:51:33 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
Branden:
Sorry to bother you so soon after my last question, but here goes:
cant connect user not authorized
other hosts cannot send clients. Xterm from a previously happy system
can no
longer send anything.
My dependance on X has become obvious, nothing else works.
If you have time, thanks
- End forwarded message -
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux |Exercise your freedom of religion. Set
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |fire to a church of your choice.
http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
pgpaExa6DYc6b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
John, I am going to guess at what you are trying to say; cutting and
pasting error messages, complete with examples of what you are trying to
execture (say, how script(1) would perform) would help immensely,
particularly with this description.
There, that said, my guess says you are trying to run clients connecting
to X using standard TCP sockets. /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc has a bit
-nolisten tcp that turns off listening to tcp sockets. This is a Good
Thing.
If you cannot use ssh(1) to forward your X connections, you could remove
the -nolisten tcp, but be aware that you will be much less secure in the
process. Consider, and reconsider, using ssh(1) for that. (Check the
debian-x archives for the last day or so for an email from me regarding
something very similar. A hint: Debian has turned off the automatic ssh
X forwarding for security reasons, but as long as you trust both hosts,
there is nothing to worry about.)
HTH
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 02:10]:
- Forwarded message from John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: John Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Xfree broken
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:51:33 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
Branden:
Sorry to bother you so soon after my last question, but here goes:
cant connect user not authorized
other hosts cannot send clients. Xterm from a previously happy system
can no
longer send anything.
My dependance on X has become obvious, nothing else works.
If you have time, thanks
- End forwarded message -
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux |Exercise your freedom of religion. Set
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |fire to a church of your choice.
http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all
really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
the potato backported packages
Charl, certain dumb people are starting to use the Debian BTS to file bugs against the potato backport packages. Even *if* my current packages are building fine out of the box on potato systems right now, there's no guarantee that will continue to be the case and I cannot support them. Please modify your packages to inform people not to use the Debian BTS. Perhaps a patch to modify xc/config/cf/linux.cf to set BuilderEmailAddr to UNSUPPORTED, UNOFFICIAL DEBIAN PACKAGES -- DO NOT FILE BUGS would work? Thanks for providing them, though. My problem is with ignorant users, not you. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | The software said it required Windows [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 3.1 or better, so I installed Linux. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | pgp6nSsK5mPVy.pgp Description: PGP signature
[stupid question warning] kernel atyfb XF86 4.0 ati driver ?
Did anybody here ever (succesfully) try to get the combination of the atyfb driver and the XFree86 4.0.x ati driver to work properly ? I'm using the lastest (-11) packages and the most current kernel (2.4.0-test12) on an2 year old laptop with an Mach64 Rage Pro LT chipset. The xserver comes up just fine, it detects the hardware properly as far as I can see however somtimes the drawing routines seem not to work which results in some (but not all !) missing or distorted buttons and menus etc. I'd prefer to continue using the atyfb instead of the vesafb on the kernel side since it makes things like scrolling on the console so much faster. If somebody wants to take a look at the startup log and config files I can mail them directly, I just don't want to burden all reading the list with it. Cheers Mike
Re: [stupid question warning] kernel atyfb XF86 4.0 ati driver ?
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 12:37:13PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did anybody here ever (succesfully) try to get the combination of the atyfb driver and the XFree86 4.0.x ati driver to work properly ? Yup, here! Working fine on two machines with RagePro. On the console I have some problems with scrolling text, ie less does not work very well but more does, but under X everything is fine. This is with 2.2.18 however, I did not test 2.4.x much yet. Christian
Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]
Seth Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 00:21]: But the question still remains: why should a user put packages on hold before an upgrade? He's got a working configuration, and AFAICS it's possible to keep it. Using the -u flag with apt would have saved him as much as using = in dselect. You are missing the point. His problems as a side issue. Problems with unstable are to be expected. The question is if there's a bug with xf4/xf3.3/utah-glx packages in woody. You seem to forget this is not a user's list. -- Marcelo
Re: Tracking XFree86 CVS on a Potato system
Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: The issue is that I want to *litterally* track XFree86 CVS. I want to be able to say ``cvs diff'' when I'm working on XFree86. Who doesn't? :) Unless someone has better ideas, then, I guess I'll install Charl's packages and then overwrite them with my own binaries (compiled from a checked out CVS source tree). Sorry if I'm missing anything, but why not do something like this (it's what I've been using for some time now): Define ProjectRoot to something other than /usr/X11R6 in your CVS tree's host.def . That way you can have one or even several local X installations. Or you can even run directly out of the CVS tree by setting the ModulePath accordingly. Of course you still need to have the X packages installed to keep dpkg and friends happy. Hope this suggestion is valuable, Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and The DRI Project
Re: [stupid question warning] kernel atyfb XF86 4.0 ati driver ?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did anybody here ever (succesfully) try to get the combination of the atyfb driver and the XFree86 4.0.x ati driver to work properly ? I'm using the lastest (-11) packages and the most current kernel (2.4.0-test12) on an2 year old laptop with an Mach64 Rage Pro LT chipset. The xserver comes up just fine, it detects the hardware properly as far as I can see however somtimes the drawing routines seem not to work which results in some (but not all !) missing or distorted buttons and menus etc. Let me suggest trying a few things: - Option UseFBDev in the XF86Config Device Section - disable console acceleration for the VT X runs on (with fbset) I'm curious about the outcome of (combinations of) these. If somebody wants to take a look at the startup log and config files I can mail them directly, I just don't want to burden all reading the list with it. Alternatively, could you put them up somewhere to look at? Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and The DRI Project
Re: Major texturing bugs in G400 DRI driver
It seems that the problem in the G400 texturing bug is fixed in the current CVS version of XFree 4 DRI. I went and downloaded the CVS source tree last night (modems have enough bandwidth when you're not sitting there waiting :) and built the server myself... it seems that there's a bug in the relatively-new fullscreen functions in the MGA driver, however; in order to get direct rendering to work at all (rather than libGL getting 'unresolved symbol' errors), I had to comment out the XF86DRICloseFullScreen and XF86DRIOpenFullScreen bits in xc/lib/GL/mesa/dri/dri_mesa.c (for some reason, mga_dri.o isn't exporting those symbols). Stencils are still broken, but that was to be expected. At least textures work again. They still don't respond to glTexEnv* though (changing the filters has no effect for example), but that's a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things. -- Joshua Shagam /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / No HTML/RTF in email www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam X No Word docs in email mp3.com/fluffyporcupine/ \ Respect for open standards
Re: -11 gives graphics corruption with V3 3000
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 10:39:55PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: xserver-xfree86-11 gives corruption on my V3 3000. Black bars run across the top of the screen, and moving windows causes corruption. I'm running at 1792x1344 using DRI. Dropping back to the xserver-10 package (and keeping the -11 ones for everything else) fixed things. Does -11 have a new upstream version? Errr, it actually WORKS at 1792x1344? *grumble* Try it at 1024x768, it may be the same bug, or a different one. Zephaniah E. Hull. (About to start filing severity important bugs against X, with patches.) -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP EA5198D1-Zephaniah E. Hull [EMAIL PROTECTED]-GPG E65A7801 Keys available at http://whitestar.soark.net/~warp/public_keys. CCs of replies from mailing lists are encouraged. ALL programs are poems, it's just that not all programmers are poets. -- Jonathan Guthrie in the scary.devil.monastery pgpdWr4wfX1d5.pgp Description: PGP signature
How do I get the TCP port back?
Hi, I while back during one of my upgrades, I read something about a new default -- X no longer listens on port 6000 for connections. I didnt pay much attention at the time, but now it turns out that I need to have remote X clients connecting to my machine, and I cant figure out how to turn this back on! :) Thanks, Norbert
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
[Error messages from John] [Branden -- will the Xwrapper.config 'console' or 'root' option prevent client connections from other hosts? Or does this effect only who can run X locally, as I hope it does? :] Bummer about not being able to use ssh. (Though I am surprised the firewall would let X connections work, but not ssh! If I had to firewall only one, I would have chosen differently. :) I also fear I wasn't clear in my previous email -- remove the whole '-nolisten tcp' bit, including the 'tcp'. You will either need to figure out how the MIT magic cookies work, or use the xhost +host options (or xauth, which I think is the magic cookies) to enable the connections from elsewhere. HTH. :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 10:08]: Seth : Xlib: connection to :0.0 refused by server Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server Application initialization failed: couldn't connect to display :0.0 - and - Can't open display blah:0.0 Sorry for the lack of error messages, just too much in a hurry. I DID remove -nolisten from /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc, it now reads: exec X -dpi 100 tcp I have clients that cannot use ssh on this network. I am behind a firewall. and still no connect... Oh, well. Thanks for your time. -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: How do I get the TCP port back?
* Norbert Veber [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 13:28]: I while back during one of my upgrades, I read something about a new default -- X no longer listens on port 6000 for connections. I didnt pay much attention at the time, but now it turns out that I need to have remote X clients connecting to my machine, and I cant figure out how to turn this back on! :) tastelessNorbert; is working at certicom really like working for a pointy-haired-boss, sadistic HR, etc?/tasteless apologeticI'm sorry; I had too./apologetic You have two options. The best option is to use ssh(1)'s X tunnelling feature. It isn't turned on by default with the debain ssh packages, but if you trust both hosts, it is safe to turn on. (If you don't trust both hosts, don't turn it on. :) If, sadly, you can't use ssh's nifty features, then removing '-nolisten tcp' from /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc will do the job. -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: [jstevens@eng.mcd.mot.com: Xfree broken]
John, I *think* xhost needs to be used more like: xhost +blah -- no space. ObQuestion: Have you restarted X since removing the -nolisten tcp bit? :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 14:43]: Seth: Oops, I am unclear again: I did use xhost + blah, and it still refuses. Also removed '-nolisten tcp'. I am rsh'ing from an old AIX box, do I need to add an ssh client to it? I don't really have access to the box aside from my few clients. The systems that are interacting are all on the same side as the Firewall. Having 'tcp' on /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc line seemed to cause no problem. Alas, it still is offline. I'm sure it will be some small configuration problem. It might be an imcompatability of R4 or something. Once this is working I will look into MIT Magic X cookies. Thanks again. Arnold wrote: [Error messages from John] [Branden -- will the Xwrapper.config 'console' or 'root' option prevent client connections from other hosts? Or does this effect only who can run X locally, as I hope it does? :] Bummer about not being able to use ssh. (Though I am surprised the firewall would let X connections work, but not ssh! If I had to firewall only one, I would have chosen differently. :) I also fear I wasn't clear in my previous email -- remove the whole '-nolisten tcp' bit, including the 'tcp'. You will either need to figure out how the MIT magic cookies work, or use the xhost +host options (or xauth, which I think is the magic cookies) to enable the connections from elsewhere. HTH. :) * John K. Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 10:08]: Seth : Xlib: connection to :0.0 refused by server Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server Application initialization failed: couldn't connect to display :0.0 - and - Can't open display blah:0.0 Sorry for the lack of error messages, just too much in a hurry. I DID remove -nolisten from /etc/X11/xinit/xserverrc, it now reads: exec X -dpi 100 tcp I have clients that cannot use ssh on this network. I am behind a firewall. and still no connect... Oh, well. Thanks for your time. -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.'' -- -- John K. Stevenson, Motorola Tempe. (602) 438-3961 (FAX 602-438-6140) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tempe. AZ Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 800-759- pin 1738917 -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late. Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Christian
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: * Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) I've been looking for an m68k emu capable of running Linux under my g4. If you know of one, I'de be very interested (with respect to getting glibc compiled done). Doesn't matter if it requires MacOS either, so long as it emulates a 68040 and runs Linux. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: m68k MANIFEST for xfree86_4.0.1-11
Ben Collins wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: * Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]: Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST). Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit faster... :) I've been looking for an m68k emu capable of running Linux under my g4. If you know of one, I'de be very interested (with respect to getting glibc compiled done). Doesn't matter if it requires MacOS either, so long as it emulates a 68040 and runs Linux. Looked at UAE yet? Don't know if that emulates an 68040... Michel -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86 and The DRI Project
Re: -11 gives graphics corruption with V3 3000
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:47:17PM -0500, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 10:39:55PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: xserver-xfree86-11 gives corruption on my V3 3000. Black bars run across the top of the screen, and moving windows causes corruption. I'm running at 1792x1344 using DRI. Dropping back to the xserver-10 package (and keeping the -11 ones for everything else) fixed things. Does -11 have a new upstream version? Errr, it actually WORKS at 1792x1344? *grumble* Yup, but only at 16bit. Increasing the resolution or trying 24bit gives corruption. Try it at 1024x768, it may be the same bug, or a different one. Ok, I'll give -11 a shot with lower resolution in the morning. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pooh@lava.cs.tu-berlin.de: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11]
I can't really follow this one. - Forwarded message from Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:46:17 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany Dear Branden, I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm a little confused with the package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 which I recently installed to my computer. Obviously, it contains the Server XFree86-3.3.6 and not 4.0.1 as the package name suggested. That's a pity, because I just changed from a self-compiled XServer back to good old Debian packages, but as you can imagine, the old XServer won't accept my configuration and my video card. Is this a bug or a feature? ;-) Bye, René -- Dipl.-Inform. René Tschirley, http://cg.cs.tu-berlin.de/~pooh TU Berlin, Computer Graphics and Computer Assisted Medicine research group - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| One man's theology is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | belly laugh. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Heinlein http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | pgppdrdQuLISg.pgp Description: PGP signature
[dwarf@polaris.net: Problem with X after upgrade to potato]
- Forwarded message from Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problem with X after upgrade to potato Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:55:39 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you noticed my clumsy postings about my potato upgrade, you will understand that I have only recently gotten apt-get to do a complete potato upgrade. As a result, I am recieving a new behavior from X that is a real bummer. When working in X, I am often switching back to a console VC, and then returning back to the X VC when done at the console. After the upgrade, often, but not always, switching back to the X server's VC will cause the server to restart. It doesn't always happen, but it happens often enough to make doing honest work very difficult. (restarting mozilla is a real yawn) Now, from what little I understand of X, this could be a problem with xdm, the xserver itself, the window manager, or possibly even a kernel interaction over VC switching signals. I haven't the foggiest idea where to look, or how to approach this problem. I can give you some gut instincts, based on this machines past performances with X. I suspect there is some kind of hardware glitch in my graphics card, but I don't have the resources to swap for another. (poverty sucks) In the past (I've owned this machine for almost 4 years now), I've had a different problem with X. On very rare occasions, clicking the mouse would cause a section of the screen to go to garbage (like static on the TV) in a small band around the mouse pointer. Each successive click made the screen uglier, however, the functions still worked well enought to log xdm out and restart the server. It would always come back up clean. (my C experience suggests a misplaced pointer, writing mouse data over screen memory, but it could be many other things as well) I don't know if this is related, but, the gpm server, on rare occasions goes belly up, and the only way I can fix it is to re-install gpm. This also suggests hardware flakeyness, but could just as easily be the result of a race condition within gpm. What I wish, is that I could afford that neat new IBM machine with the flat screen and the machine built into the screen base, but I don't have the 4 grand... Any suggestions on my X problem would be greatfully appreciated. Thanks, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_- Author of The Debian Linux User's Guide _-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_- - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson|Measure with micrometer, Debian GNU/Linux |mark with chalk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] |cut with axe, http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |hope like hell. pgpWHkHfrFdpK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [pooh@lava.cs.tu-berlin.de: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11]
Rene (sorry, no idea how to get the nifty ' atop the 'e'. :) -- I haven't got a clue what you mean. :) It isn't so obvious to me, nor likely obvious to anyone else, that the 3.3.6 X server is in the package labeled 4.0.1-11. :) Sometimes, it is the obvious things that need to be pointed out -- since it mightnot be obvious to anyone else. :) Chances are good you want the task-x-window-system package installed. HTH * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 20:03]: I can't really follow this one. - Forwarded message from Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Rene Tschirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Debian Package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:46:17 +0100 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany Dear Branden, I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm a little confused with the package xserver-common_4.0.1-11 which I recently installed to my computer. Obviously, it contains the Server XFree86-3.3.6 and not 4.0.1 as the package name suggested. That's a pity, because I just changed from a self-compiled XServer back to good old Debian packages, but as you can imagine, the old XServer won't accept my configuration and my video card. Is this a bug or a feature? ;-) Bye, René -- Dipl.-Inform. René Tschirley, http://cg.cs.tu-berlin.de/~pooh TU Berlin, Computer Graphics and Computer Assisted Medicine research group - End forwarded message - -- G. Branden Robinson| One man's theology is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | belly laugh. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Heinlein http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
Re: [dwarf@polaris.net: Problem with X after upgrade to potato]
[No need to mail Branden directly; debian-user or debian-x are probably the better forums anyway.] * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 20:46]: - Forwarded message from Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] - When working in X, I am often switching back to a console VC, and then returning back to the X VC when done at the console. After the upgrade, often, but not always, switching back to the X server's VC will cause the server to restart. It doesn't always happen, but it happens often enough to make doing honest work very difficult. (restarting mozilla is a real yawn) Dale, I had this same problem myself, with pre-release versions of Branden's .debs. (The -phase1 and -phase2 releases.) I wrote a message off to matrox, they wrote back some obvious things, but nothing helped. Sadly, I don't recall if the problem went away when I upgraded the matrox-supplied mga_drv.o driver, or at some point when Branden updated the CVS he was tracking. :( It might not hurt to comment out the GLX/DRI stuff in your XF86Config-4 file, if you don't need them. It isn't perfect. :) HTH -- ``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
