Re: [XFree86] Please Help Me
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:09:37AM -0400, Andrew Haninger wrote: > On 8/22/05, charles williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Start looking for another job. > > In the meantime, I've researched his errors a bit more. The error > about not being able to find "default font 'fixed'" is common and > generally means there's some problem with (surprise!) loading the > fonts. The other error that he gave that was returned by 'startx' was: > > XIO:fatal io error 104 (connection reset by peer) on X server ":0.0" >after 0 requests (0 known processed) with 0 events remaining. > > Googling for this error returned many results. One in particular > looked helpful. Here are the relevant links: > > Initial report: > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gdm-list/2002-August/msg3.html > Reply: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gdm-list/2002-August/msg4.html > > Note the reply to the initial problem report: > > Jules> Fatal server error: could not open default font 'fixed' > > You X Font Server isn't running. /etc/init.d/xfs start. > > Again, this suggests that the font server simply isn't running. > Restarting it should allow XFree86 to work or at least should cause it > to fail in some other way that can then be diagnosed further. Yes. Very specifically, that error almost always means "your OS thinks the font server is *not* supposed to be on, and your Xconfig thinks it is". > Furthermore, I'm quite aware that I need to start looking for a new > job. I'm not allowed to stay in my current part-time position much > longer as I'm graduating from college soon. If you have any > suggestions, I'd be interested to hear them. Oooh! Nice one. ;-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "NPR has a lot in common with Nascar... we both turn to the left." - Peter Sagal, on Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me! ___ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@XFree86.Org http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Oh lord I hate Linux!!
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 12:21:51PM +1100, Nik Trevallyn-Jones wrote: > I need to post a couple of corrections to my previous post. Apologies > for the disinformation. > > Nik wrote: > > To re-install XFree only, a command something like the following should > > work for you: rpm -Uvh `rpm -q -a | grep XFree` > > Wrong, wrong, wrong. > > Much simpler: rpm -Uvh /XFree*.rpm > > (I should have mentioned that because this is system software, you will > need to be 'root' to do this.) You need to be root anyway, to rpm; the databases are not user-accessible in a standard install. > > You will almost certainly have to add the '--force' option to the UVh > > part: rpm -Uvh --force `rpm -q -a | grep Xfree` > > This still holds true. Nope. --nodeps. --force does *not* imply --nodeps, and that's the one that will often kill you. > Out of interest, my mistake was caused by my confusing issues with > erasing a set of rpms with installing them. If you want (or find you > need) to remove the XFree rpms before you install the RedHat ones, a > command something like: > > rpm -e `rpm -q -a | grep XFree` should do the trick. *This* will *definitely* require nodeps, since you'll find a metric shitload of stuff that depends on X being installed. None of that stuff really *should*, but it does. > rpm -q -a | rpm -e > > I cannot now remember whether I needed to use the '--pipe' option on the > first component to make that work. Oh, my, would that be bad. :-) rpm -e `rpm -qa | grep XFree` I wrap the internal command up as 'rpgrep', and that reduces to rpm -r `rpgrep XFree` I have *lots* of -grep command scripts. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system adminstrator. Or two. --me ___ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@XFree86.Org http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] How to set up two monitors with ATI Mach64 Rage Pro AGP and S3 Trio64V2 (fwd)
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 02:56:21PM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 08:16:32AM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: > > > This is a system BIOS issue, a problem particularly common with Dell's > > > lobotomised BIOSes. And there's very little the driver can do about it. > > > Depending on your kernel, you _might_ be able to get past this point by > > > configuring it to use atyfb to drive the Rage Pro. > > > Would it be practical to teach XFree to let the user lie to it, and > > pretend to be the BIOS? I know it would be another config file (or > > extension), but this seems a fairly common problem. > > > Is the problem just that the BIOS won't tell X what it needs to know, > > or does it actively get in the way? > > Such things as video memory timing and the like are VERY adapter-specific, > making it quite unrealistic for the driver to perform adapter initialisation. > Thus the driver requires that the adapter be previously initialised or have a > BIOS available. This is simply a consequence of ATI's adapter design and > there's dick-all the driver can do about it. Ok. I wasn't sure whether the problem was that the card was ready to go but the BIOS neglected to tell the server something that the user could, or if the problem was that that card was uninitialized. > One could, I suppose, boot with the onboard adapter as primary, save its > initialised BIOS somewhere, and have int10 use that copy in the multihead > situation. But the code to do that (securely or not) just isn't there. Sure. > Your options, at this point, are to talk to Dell (dead end), give up on the > onboard adapter in multihead, replace your motherboard, or get a system that's > not so broken. Or, as I suggested above, atyfb _might_ come in handy for a > change. Someone else's options; I was just kibitzing. Some people actually *do* subscribe to this list. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy, but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board." -- Luke Girardi ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] How to set up two monitors with ATI Mach64 Rage Pro AGP and S3 Trio64V2 (fwd)
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 08:16:32AM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: > This is a system BIOS issue, a problem particularly common with Dell's > lobotomised BIOSes. And there's very little the driver can do about it. > Depending on your kernel, you _might_ be able to get past this point by > configuring it to use atyfb to drive the Rage Pro. Would it be practical to teach XFree to let the user lie to it, and pretend to be the BIOS? I know it would be another config file (or extension), but this seems a fairly common problem. Is the problem just that the BIOS won't tell X what it needs to know, or does it actively get in the way? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy, but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board." -- Luke Girardi ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] how does X find modelines?
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 12:51:55PM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: > My problem was that XF86config was choosing to put a bunch of > modelines in the config file which worked but looked lousy. For > instance, in the case of my laptop which has a 1280x800 native > resolution to the screen it was setting things up for 1280x1024 which > looked blurry. This page allowed me to correctly set the resolution I > wanted which XF86config wasn't able to do for me. Ok, *here's* the weird part. I have a client whose laptop is likewise 1280x800. SuSE's SAX refused to set that size. it would let me set 1280x1024. *But then it actually *did* 1280x800* at server start, anyway. Says so, right there in the log. *Even though there's no modeline for that 1280x800*. Go figure *that* one out. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy, but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board." -- Luke Girardi ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] error in running in tightvnc(Xvnc)
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:55:08PM +0530, gaurav wrote: > i have downloaded xvnc(for showing remote desktop).but it is not running > properly > on running Xvnc it gives following erros. > " > _XSERVTransSocketINETCreateListener: ...SocketCreateListener() failed > _XSERVTransMakeAllCOTSServerListeners: server already running > > Fatal server error: > Cannot establish any listening sockets - Make sure an X server isn't > already running." > > please tell me how can we deal with this error and also tell me > what is the exact procedure of running this Xvnc software. It is likely, I think, that you don't understand that the stock Xvnc does *not* permit 'co-pilot' operation of a desktop visible on a hardware video adapter, as the Windows servers do. Xvnc expects to run in the background, and *only* be connected to by remot clients -- if you want to talk to a stock Xvnc from it's local machine, you have to run a vncviewer client *on the real X server*... and it's that Xserver that your Xvnc server is likely colliding with, since it lives, by default, on :0, which is probably where your Xvnc server is trying to go too. If that's not enough hint, reply to the list and we'll try to explain further. Cheers , -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy, but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board." -- Luke Girardi ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X host -client without X server present on machine.
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 11:09:45AM -0500, John Chatelle wrote: > I'm looking to install a minimal X - Host Client that X servers may > connect to that doesn't itself have an X server, XDM, or window manager > installed. I don't want the application server to bring up X by itself at > all, but serve X applications to X servers on the secure local network. Yep; not a bad idea. > It seems I would just need the Xlib and whatever X toolkit, such as > LessTif. All I see though is directions on how to bring up X Servers; > never the simplest client/host X configurations. > >What is the minimum needed for an application server, such that it itself > doesn't have an X server? Why isn't this done more often? Cause it's a pain. :-) Roughly, you need any library wanted by any binary you try to run; ldd will tell you what those are for any given binary. You might do a sort/uniq to get a complete list... >I'm running Redhat 7.3 and have RedHat 9 so would tend to want to run > XFree86 4.3.0-2. Am I making a mistake doing this? Can't see why. > This message and any attachments may contain information that is protected > by law as privileged and confidential, and is transmitted for the sole use > of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you > are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying or retention of > this e-mail or the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If > you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the > sender by e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail. Please find a way to remove this trailer from list mail; it makes people less likely to want to help you since they're often not sure they legally can. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 2004 Stanley Cup Champion Tampa Bay Lightning ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] perhaps a silly question
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:44:23AM -0700, Matthew McGraw wrote: > i had to run the shell-script based setup of xfree86 > b/c the graphical one didn't work. now, whenever i > start x... the desktop is bigger than my monitor... > when i move my mouse to the edge of the screen, it > pans... is this an xFree86 setting (if so, how do i > "unset" it.) or a kde setting (if so, sorry to bug you > all) If the maximum screen size that the hardware can do is less than the maximum screen size on your config file, this will happen. Check (probably) /etc/XF86Config(-4), and trim out any screen size descriptors that are larger than you're getting out of the video card. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Re: SyncOnGreen for Sun 1662b fixed resolution monitor?
On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 02:29:41PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote: > "Jay R. Ashworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It's worse than that (, he's dead, Jim). > > ... > > But the card has to be designed for SoG, or you need to build an > > external 5-to-3 adapter, which isn't guaranteed to work well. > > Really? Browsing the source I see tons of mentions of SyncOnGreen including > registers specifically for that. The MGA driver in particular seems to do > *something* when you say SyncOnGreen. > > You're saying no standard PC card has SyncOnGreen as an option? It was my understanding when I last researched this that very few VGA adapters had the hardware support to combine the H and V sync signals on the Green channel's output, yes. That was why SI87 and the other guys (whose name eludes me for the moment) made so much money. MGA were, IIRC, one of the few who did it right, but their cards were all as expensive as the specialty ones, at the time (1995ish). Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X 4.3.99.902 Compile error
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 11:38:27AM -0600, I wrote: >On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 07:06:37AM -0500, Wise, Jeremey wrote: >I think you're gonna find out you don't have it installed, as difficult >as that is to fathom -- so *much* stuff uses curses. > >On second look, that error from ld seems wrong, too; it shouldn't be >looking for "-lncurses", it should be looking for "libncurses". I'm >wondering if that's a thinko in the makefile -- perhaps the .o files >should be at the end; there isn't anything else after xstrings.o, which >may be confusing getargs in gcc. > >Noting that you're in the beta, I'm leaning towards this; I suspect >someone hosed the makefile. And JD Ross replied: > You need libncurses-dev. And of course, he's right, Jeremey; sorry for the mislead. I'd forgotten that the ncurses package only includes the runtime library, not the linker stub. What I get for being only theoretically knowledgeable. :-) Look for a package like ncurses-devel, that matches the version number of whatever your ncurses is. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] 8-bit color in XFree86
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 03:02:26PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote: > On Thursday 01 January 2004 02:36 pm, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > C'mon, Eric; you know the drill: give us a server log. > > My bad, here it is. BTW, the original setup was with an integrated Intel > i810e graphics card and the additional nVidia card. We've removed the nVidia > card and are just working on the intel card now. Weird. I know that the 810's have bios problems on some laptops, but I assume that's not the problem here -- though if it's an Intel mobo, I suppose that's still a possibility. Just locks up like that at that point in the log? What happens on screen? And have you re-run whatever configurator your distro might come with from scratch since pulling the other card? 'sworth a try, I think. (Find your current Xconfig file and rename it outta the way first...) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] SyncOnGreen for Sun 1662b fixed resolution monitor?
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 01:27:55PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote: > Which drivers and cards are capable of sync on green and what do I need to > achieve it? > > I've put the ``Option "SyncOnGreen"'' in the Monitor section. Do I need a > separate csync option somewhere? > > Browsing the source it seems not every driver implements this. I have a choice > of three graphics cards: > > :02:0b.0 Display controller: Texas Instruments TVP4010 [Permedia] (rev 01) > :02:0a.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage I/II 215GT > [Mach64 GT] (rev 41) > :01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Matrox Graphics, Inc. MGA G400 AGP (rev 04) > > From the source it looks like the only one that actually implements > SyncOnGreen is the MGA driver. That kind of sucks because I really don't want > to give up the good graphics card for my main monitor. It's worse than that (, he's dead, Jim). > Is there any way to get sync on green using either of these other cards? Maybe > a jumper? What other inexpensive cards that I might find in a bargain bin are > capable of sync-on-green? Well, they're all cheaper than they used to be. But the card has to be designed for SoG, or you need to build an external 5-to-3 adapter, which isn't guaranteed to work well. Google for fixed-frequency, and just about everything on the first page ought to be helpful. I have an HP 3-jack; I know how you feel. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Problem with Savage/IX PCI on SuSE 9 pro
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 01:44:12PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > I know NIL about the savage driver but what happens if you strip out all > > those funky Modelines from your XF86Config and just set up the > > VertRefresh/HorizSync ranges in the Monitor section to match your > > monitor (unless the ones you have actually are correct)? > > Well, the modelines that are there were put there by SaX, but sure, I > can comment them out and see what happens. I've already handmangled > the monitor section; yeah; that part's right. Alas, that didn't help much, as didn't running X -configure, and using that file. I just can't get about 640, and without CRTOnly and UseBIOS No, I can't get anything at all. Ok; time for a new video card. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Problem with Savage/IX PCI on SuSE 9 pro
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 07:42:48PM +0200, Thomas Winischhofer wrote: > > But, since even the new, improved XFree logs don't really tell you > > enough about what they're *actually* providing, I'm not sure what the > > other modes are, in consequence of which, I can't tell why I can't get > > the 1024x768x16x85Hz that Windows has no problem providing. > > > > Do I really have to buy a new card? Or is there something on the > > configuration or debugging messages front that I'm missing? > > > > Heeelllpp!??!?!?!!! :-) > > I know NIL about the savage driver but what happens if you strip out all > those funky Modelines from your XF86Config and just set up the > VertRefresh/HorizSync ranges in the Monitor section to match your > monitor (unless the ones you have actually are correct)? Well, the modelines that are there were put there by SaX, but sure, I can comment them out and see what happens. I've already handmangled the monitor section; yeah; that part's right. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Font server crashes frequently
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 05:00:56PM -0400, E'very Ware wrote: > > You didn't attach any relevant xfs-is-dying messages from syslog, so... > > The logs that I looked at were "xdm-errors", "XFree86.0.log" and my > "messages" log files. Yes. The font server is likely (you'll have to check it's configs) logging to syslog, you need to find out why it's dying. > The only consistant thing that I see is this line right before it > crashes (in xdm-errors) > > > > (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/XF86Config-4" > > > Could not init font path element unix/:7100, removing from list! > > > > > > Fatal server error: > > > could not open default font 'fixed' That's not the font server, that is the *X server* trying to restart and being unable to, *because* the font server has already died. If you're not *killing* the X server, you might want to investigate why *it* is dying, too. > Which relevant file(s) should I be referring to to determine why I am > having this problem? Well, I'd start in the xfs config and the syslog. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Font server crashes frequently
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 10:17:41AM -0400, E'very Ware wrote: > I have about 10 ncd hmx terminal connecting to this terminal. I have the > server set to reboot once a week on Sunday. Every monday morning the > font server crashes. I restart it and it crashes again usually with 48 > hours. I have pined through the logs and have following error: > > > (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/XF86Config-4" > > Could not init font path element unix/:7100, removing from list! > > > > Fatal server error: > > could not open default font 'fixed' > > I am trying to determine how to resolve this problem. I have attached a > copy of the log files as well as the config file. Any ideas on how to > proceed? FAQ! FAQ!! Your xserver is configured to want a font server running; yours is likely dying for some reason. This isn't that uncommonThis isn't that uncommonThis isn't that uncommonThis isn't that uncommon ... (re-reads message) Oh, you *did* say "font server". You reboot *which* server on Sundays? The machine? X? I assume you don't mean the font server. :-) I assume it's not simply that you don't have xfs configured to start at boot in runlevel 5.. You might want to check the xfs config file, particularly use-syslog and error-file, and think about running xfs from /etc/inittab, with -daemon. Or run memtest86 for a day or two, if you can spare the time; maybe you have bad memory. You didn't attach any relevant xfs-is-dying messages from syslog, so... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] xf86config serial mouse problems
On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 03:12:56PM -0500, Daniel Luecke wrote: > Perhaps i do not know the correct mouse location or setting. Also when i > try "startx" it gives me an error the it could not find "protocol > "sysmouse" even when i dont have it set on that. Is there perhaps a > prolem with the xf86config file? > > btw, the error output is: > > /"(= =)using config 'xf86config' > (ee)mouse1: protocol 'sysmouse' is not supported by this platform > (ee)preinit: failed for input device "Mouse1" > no core pointer I'd bet cash that the problem is that you're not using the config file you think you are. I believe the log file says, at it's head, which file you're actually looking at; double check that this is the one you're editing. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] disable core pointer
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:06:05AM +0200, Ashendra Singh wrote: > How do I completely disable my mouse, ie. no cursor visible on screen Completely disabling your mouse will leave you with a cursor parked in the *middle* of your screen, immobile. What you want is to make your cursor *transparent*, a topic which has been covered on this list before, repeatedly. Track down the list archives, and sift through them. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Midnight Commander & SCO Unix
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 07:16:42AM +0400, Netcity wrote: > We have established Midnight Commander in SCO Unix, but instead of standard borders > and frameworks, symbols are shown? Could not help us with the decision of this > problem? What it is necessary to establish fonts that Midnight Commander it was > normally displayed in SCO Unix? > And how correctly to adjust these fonts? Your problem is likely not X related, but I'll answer it anyway. Try $ mapchan -n Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xfree86
On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 10:45:19AM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote: > > I am new to Linux ( I can hear you groan ) > > > > I have been trying to install Xine or Rplayer onto my Redhat Enterprise WS Linux > > installation & was told I needed XFree86 which I carefully downloaded the correct > > version from your website & I think installed it correctly > > > > I still cannot load either Xine or Rplayer as there other dependencies they need > > but that is not my main concern at the moment > > > > When I boot Linux now, at the login screen when I normally go straight into the > > KDE GUI, I have a window open that calls itself Console log for > > localhost.localdomain > > If you were running KDE before, you obviously already had XFree86 > running. I assume you downloaded and installed a newer version of > XFree86 for upgrade purposes. Nope, Mark; he almost certainly did it for I-don't-know-any-better purposes. Hopefully, he hasn't horked his entire install, but I wouldn't bet cash. > > Even at the login screen I choose the session type radio buttons & click KDE or > > GNOME all I go into is a new screen called xterm > > It sounds like no window manager is configured. I'm not sure > what the prefered way to change window managers is on RH these days. > They used to have an app called "switchdesk". You might try running > that. It probably gives an option to start KDE. > > > > I now realise that XFree86 is a lot more than a necessary library for Xine etc but > > I have bitten off a bit more than I can chew Chris has. Chris, find a local geek who speaks RedHat; this has gotten too big to deal with on a mailing list, I'm afraid. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] problems with KVM switch and mouse
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 03:45:21PM -0500, John Bob wrote: > I have 2 pcs connected to a 4 way KVM switch. On one PC I run Windows XP and > on another I run Linux Debian. When I boot up my Linux box I have > connectivity with my mouse. However, when I switch to my Windows box and > then back to the Linux box my mouse loses connectivity under Linux but not > Windows. Any help in debugging this isse would be greatly appreciated Either get 'ghost adapters' for the Linux box, or get a smarter KVM. Don't even bother to try and fix this any other way. Really. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] 10sec delay for some Apps with X-4.4.0
On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 11:07:24PM +0530, Arvind R. wrote: > Now with 4.4.0, everythings OK except that some apps > ( xterm, gnome-apps ) have a 10second load delay. > Funnily on the sparc ( only ), shutting down ethernet removes > this delay-behaviour. The only difference 'tween the i386 > and sparc is that the i386 does not have IPv6 support enabled. > > Going through the archives on debian-x, I found something about > /tmp/ICE-unix and /tmp/x11-unix being not owned by root - but > that's not the case with me - they ARE owned by root. > > Other than this delay-problem, the systems have been working > without any noticeable glitch for about 10 days. And the > video acceleration is noticeable. The first rule of Unix networking is "*any* weird delay problem is probably reverse DNS", moreso because if you have the interface down, it goes away -- reverse lookups will fail completely, quickly, if they can't *reach* the server Check your /etc/hosts file on the sparc, too, and see if it has an IPv6ish localhost entry. Sort of shooting from the hip, but it's a place to go if you ain't been there already. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xconfigurator help
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:38:53PM -0500, Alan Pike wrote: > This seems to be exactly my problem. A few minutes tinkering with the config > file and using your email as a guide helped out tremendously. Now for some > reason I have to 'startx' at login and have lost my usual gnome login > screen. I'm betting you (or your init) switched your current runlevel (or your initdefault) from 5 to 3. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "They had engineers in my day, too." -- Perry Vance Nelson ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] XFree garbles (vesa fb) text consoles
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 02:52:30AM +, Éric wrote: > If i still have a X server running and return to it, or start a new one, > i get a perfectly, normally working X session. The only way i found to > get consoles back to usable state without rebooting, is to - either > remotely or from a shell script - run a bare X server in 1024x768 16bpp > (the mode that matches my console mode) and "kill -9" it forcing the > screen to be left in this mode, then use chvt to switch to a text console. > > Machine is a standard i686 PC with a Geforce3 TI, running XFree86 4.3 on > Linux kernel 2.4.22. I use VESA framebuffer 1024x768 16bpp for console As a diagnostic tool, have you tried booting with your console in VGA text mode, to see what it does *then* when you switch? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X 4.3.99.902 Compile error
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:43:17PM -0500, George Socker wrote:
> > I wasn't clear on two points: the -lncurses switch, which *is*
> > present on the command line in the makefile, should be causing the
> > linker to look for libncurses, *which it clearly is not* from the
> > error message.
> Actually, it *is* looking for libncurses.so, despite the error message
> saying -lncurses was not found.
> Example
> gcc test1.c -lGL1 (which does not exist)
> Result: /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.2.3/../../../../
> i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lGL1
>
> Strace -f results -
> [pid 3016] open("/usr/lib/libGL1.so", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such
> file or directory) ^
> Note that is is looking libGL1.so, not GL1. The linker
> automatically
> adds the lib portion. See man ld.
I hereby modify my complaint: that error messaage is *wildly* broken. :-)
Pretty clearly that was the instant problem, since adding the library
requested fixed his first problem.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100
The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think
Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net!
___
XFree86 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X 4.3.99.902 Compile error
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:28:50AM -0500, Wise, Jeremey wrote: > You are correct in that all I did was install ncurses-dev to get past that > error. Now it compiles for about 70min (vs 20min) then errors out. (see post > from yesterday). > > PS: Is their another group or list I can post my next set of errors to. I > tried several times to try and bypass the errors to get the compile to > finish. I know I have to be so close to completion, but I don't know what > the issue is. No, I'd say the odds are good that you're in the right place. Unless there'sa -devel list I'm not aware of; since what you're building is a beta, you might be welcome there, too. If there is, it's likely someone who's on both lists will pipe up here and let you know. I feel your pain; I'm fighting with mod_perl and WebGUI myself right now. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X 4.3.99.902 Compile error
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:00:29PM -0500, George Socker wrote: > On Tuesday, January 06 2004 12:38 pm, JD Ross wrote: > > You need libncurses-dev. > > > > Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > >On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 07:06:37AM -0500, Wise, Jeremey wrote: > > >>gcc -m32 -o resize -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -fno-strict-aliasing > > >> -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wpointer-arith > > >>-Wstrict-prototypes-Wmissing-prototypes > > >>-Wmissing-declarations -Wredundant-decls > > >>-Wnested-externs -Wundef -L../../exports/lib resize.o > > >>xstrings.o -lncurses -Wl,-rpath-link,../../exports/lib > > >>/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-suse-linux/3.3.1/../../../../i586-suse-linux/ > > >>bin/ld: cannot find -lncurses > > > > > >Normal ordinary C compilation eror -- I'm not an X Guy, and I can > > > tell you how to fix it. > > > > > >On second look, that error from ld seems wrong, too; it shouldn't be > > >looking for "-lncurses", it should be looking for "libncurses". I'm > > >wondering if that's a thinko in the makefile -- perhaps the .o files > > >should be at the end; there isn't anything else after xstrings.o, > > > which may be confusing getargs in gcc. > > > > Actually, it should be "-lncurses". The linker automatically turns given > library names into "libxxx.so". If you use "-llibncurses", the linker > will look for "liblibncurses.so" and will fail. I wasn't clear on two points: the -lncurses switch, which *is* present on the command line in the makefile, should be causing the linker to look for libncurses, *which it clearly is not* from the error message. Secondly, that may be *happening* (I thought) because there is no file name following those switches on the linker command line... but apparently the linker *would* tolerate that (and incidentally, "is generating a misleading error") since all he did was install the missing ncurses-devel package (so far as I know), and the problem went away. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] (no subject)
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:11:36PM -0600, Jon Warren wrote: > -Jon Warren > Phone: 402-894-7043 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] We're *so* glad to hear that, Jon. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] (no subject)
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:53:01PM -0500, Swapnil Bhatia wrote: > Could not init font path element unix/:7100, removing from list! > > Fatal server error: > could not open default font 'fixed' FAQ! FAQ! FAQ! This means that your Xserver installation did not install any fixed fonts (or it put them in a non-standard location that your Xconfig file doesn't know to look in), which is usually because it also installed a font server -- and yours has fallen over. If a reboot doesn't clear this, it's usually because either you shut it off (with ntsysv or equivalent) or because it's failing when it starts; check your syslog. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] X 4.3.99.902 Compile error
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 07:06:37AM -0500, Wise, Jeremey wrote: > gcc -m32 -o resize -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -fno-strict-aliasing -ansi > -pedantic -Wall -Wpointer-arith > -Wstrict-prototypes-Wmissing-prototypes > -Wmissing-declarations -Wredundant-decls > -Wnested-externs -Wundef -L../../exports/lib resize.o > xstrings.o -lncurses -Wl,-rpath-link,../../exports/lib > /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-suse-linux/3.3.1/../../../../i586-suse-linux/bin/ld: > cannot find -lncurses Normal ordinary C compilation eror -- I'm not an X Guy, and I can tell you how to fix it. The compile is trying to build resize, and wants the ncurses library... which I can't imagine *isn't* on your machine *somewhere*... but clearly, it's not on the search path that GCC is looking in. Locate (or install) it, and then either symlink it into a useful place, or modify the makefile. (Actually, that might be the *imake*file; this is where you got into "needs to be an Xguy" territory. I think you're gonna find out you don't have it installed, as difficult as that is to fathom -- so *much* stuff uses curses. On second look, that error from ld seems wrong, too; it shouldn't be looking for "-lncurses", it should be looking for "libncurses". I'm wondering if that's a thinko in the makefile -- perhaps the .o files should be at the end; there isn't anything else after xstrings.o, which may be confusing getargs in gcc. Noting that you're in the beta, I'm leaning towards this; I suspect someone hosed the makefile. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Problems using a Dell SX270 with Intel i865G graphic
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 08:45:52PM +0100, Christoph Jäger wrote: > The system has an Intel i865G graphics chip (onboard) with no separate > graphics memory (should use the system's main memory). As far as I can > see, although I changed teh BIOS settings to reserve 8MB of memory for > graphics, what the X-server finds is only 1MB (in the end, it find 832kB > of usable memory). So I can only get it to work in 640x480, which is > quite unsatisfying on a 20" TFT, which can do 1600x1200. > I would be very glad if someone could give me a hint of what to do to > finally get my new system up and running. I believe the current received wisdom is "sue Dell". You have, AFAICT, the dreaded "Stupid Intel BIOS Bug", which limits the memory to 1MB no matter what you tell it. Come to think of it, perhaps I was mistaken in telling the other guy silly enough to be playing with X on New Year's Day that it was mostlya laptop problem. Check the mailing list archives for the last month or month and a half, at www.xfree86.org; there's more technical detail there than you really want to know about. Take Dramamine first. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] 8-bit color in XFree86
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 02:38:22PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote: > Hello again all, and Happy New Year! You too, sirrah. > I'm trying to configure a system for my buddy who has an nVidia 440 MX video > card. For some reason XFree86 will only do 8-bit color. Anyone tell me how > to get it to do 24-bit color? C'mon, Eric; you know the drill: give us a server log. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] xfree disband ??????
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:58:19PM -0300, Marcel Mourguiart Montt wrote: > [30 December 2003] > The XFree86 core team has voted to disband itself, effective 31 December > 2003. Comments about this can be made on Forum at XFree86 dot org ; > registration is not necessary. > > Is this a joke ??? Apparently not, though there's some question in my mind as to whether it isn't "picking up my ball and going home" on someone's part after the public fracas with Keith Packard earlier this year. LWN has it http://lwn.net/Articles/64781/ from Slashdot: http://slashdot.org/articles/03/12/31/1337209.shtml?tid=104&tid=185&tid=189 Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Error when starting X on redhat 7.3
On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 05:17:27PM -0500, Patrick Bolduc wrote: > <> > Fatal error: could not open default font 'fixed' > could not init font path element unix/:7100, removing from list > XIO: Fatal IO error 104(connection reset by peer) on X Server ":0.0" after 0 > request (0 know processeed) with 0 events remaining It means that either you shut off xfs, or it's dying for some reason. Run ntsysv, and see if it thinks it's supposed to start xfs in runlevel 5. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Using X remotely
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:48:07PM +0200, Scharf Yuval wrote: > At home I have an ADSL connection (750 kbps / 96kbps) > My university has a very good connection. > > If I try to use a graphical application remotely it runs very slow. > It takes dozens of seconds to start and everything take lots of time. > > Can I expect to get a reasonable graphical connection in this setting? Not really. > Can I do something (install something or change the configuration) in > either of the sides to improve the situation? Check out VNC, and particularly TightVNC, www.tightvnc.com. Note that this will require your having administrative permission to replace the X server on your workstation (or add a second one). I've run VNC over a 56K wireless link; it's not *too* horrible. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] hiding X cursor and turning off X sleep mode
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:13:40PM -0800, Mark Vojkovich wrote: > > my second question is, after a while of inactivity, my > > monitor goes to sleep. But, if I am playing a video > > with 'mplayer', it doesn't go to sleep. > >Mplayer deliberately does that. It disables power management > so that it doesn't come on when you're playing movies. And, amusingly enough, on one of my two laptops, both running almost exactly cloned installs of Rh73, it gets it wrong: the panel blacks out after 30 seconds anyway. That's my Armada 4220, I think that's the BIOS screenblanker setting; it might not be able to override it. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] hiding X cursor and turning off X sleep mode
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 03:44:19PM -0800, dave giffin wrote: > do you know how to hide the X cursor? This was bandied about a month or so ago; I believe the best answer was "create a cursor that has no bits on at all, and switch to it." If you're wanting to do this in non-custom code, it might be a bit more difficult. I'd check the archives of this mailing list (which you might not have actually realized *was* a mailing list) and see if you can find that thread. They should be at the website. Google for it otherwise. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net! ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] StartX before login
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:40:12PM -0600, RalexEnUSA wrote: > I am using FreeBSD 4.8, and there is no inittab. What you're looking for is a way to start kdm, and you can do it, I suspect, in /etc/rc somewhere late. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] How to terminate X?
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 07:02:06PM -0800, Sandy Cheema wrote: >I do have nVIDIA drivers for Linux but I don't know how to terminate X >server to reach the console. I have tried [Ctrl+Alt+Backspace] and >[Ctrl+X] but neither of those commands terminate it. Instead, >[Ctrl+Alt+Backspace] puts the system in standby. Ctrl-Alt-F1 should put you on the text console. Edit /etc/inittab to change the initdefault from 5 to 3, reboot, log in as root, and use startx 2>>/tmp/xerrors to test your configuration tweaking. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] dual-head - dual-user question
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 08:03:57AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: > > Certainly. You can run multiple copies of X, or multiple xdm's, > > on separate > > virtual consoles, and use Ctrl-Atl-7, Ctrl-Alt-8, etc, to switch between > > them. > > As I had thought and hoped, but wasn't sure. Thanks! > > If User 1 runs on DISPLAY=localhost:0 and User 2 runs on DISPLAY=localhost:1 > (or however that would really be described, based I guess on the graphics > hardware I choose) then would they be able to F7 to each other's > displays? I hope not, and I would presume that normal Linux permissions > would prohibit that. (Unless possibly User 1 == User 2) Since they're both on the console, yes, you'd be able to switch between them: remember, they're on the same monitor. If, in fact, they're *not* on the same monitor, then I don't know *how* the console driver (which is in *front* of all of this stuff) handles that. > > Um, where were you planning to plug in a second keyboard? :-) > > I was thinking PS/2 for the primary keyboard and mouse, and then USB for the > secondary keyboard and mouse. I'm guessing that it would be *fairly* easy to > keep the two straight that way. Duplicate USB devices sounds dangerous to > me. Maybe there's some sort of keyboard/mouse to Ethernet adapter for this > sort of remote application? Hadn't thought of that. I'm not sure how well that will work; you'd have to *keep* Linux from seeing the one on the USB port -- you *only* want X(2) to see it, and I'm not sure you can. > FYI - It's probably understood, but keyboard/mouse A must always be > associated with monitor A. Not much good to be in one room typing things on > the other monitor. ;-) Yeah. :-) > > Look into DOSVNC and a spare 386. > > No, we do that already. This is a more specialized situation in an area > where I have absolutely zero background. (I'm just an end-user type.) My point was merely that it may be cost-ineffective to go through all this work, unless you can find someone else who's already done it, and can cookbook it for you. But I guess that's what you're doing, isn't it? Any special reason why they need to share the machine? Computers are *CHEAP*. You can't cost-justify the *labor* to figure this out before you've paid for a new box... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] dual-head - dual-user question
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 07:21:51AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: >Can XFree86, with any known graphics hardware configuration, handle two > separate users running two separate XFree desktops on the same PC? These two > users would log in separately, but share machine resources. ssh is not an > option. Certainly. You can run multiple copies of X, or multiple xdm's, on separate virtual consoles, and use Ctrl-Atl-7, Ctrl-Alt-8, etc, to switch between them. >The best solution, in my mind, would be if a single dual-head graphics > adapter could be used such that one user is on one monitor and the other > user is on a second monitor. *Maybe*. I'm not real familiar with multi-head. I suspect not, but I might be wrong. >Less compelling, but still acceptable in my specific case, would be a > second graphics adapter, PCI-based, that displayed the second desktop. This might be easier. >Is anything like this possible? Can the two monitors be considered as two > completely separate displays by XFree? Um, where were you planning to plug in a second keyboard? :-) Look into DOSVNC and a spare 386. http://c0w.inode.at/mjy/dosvnc.html (warning: political comment on page) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Background in X
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 01:06:24PM -0500, Anoop wrote: > Hi, How can I get a background picture in X ( or desktop wallpaper as M$ > likes to call it)? Also can I change the same for the XDM login screen? Well, this isn't actually where you'd best put that sort of query, but 1) xsetroot 2) check out the app-defaults files for the resources necessary -- note that you might be using kdm or gdm instead of xdm. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] dual heads/single card help please
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 10:51:54PM -0400, Eric J Bowser wrote: > OK. Once again, Radeon 7500, XFree86 4.3.99.12. Trying to use mergedfb > with dri acceleration. It seems like no matter what I try, I get the > following log message: > > (WW) RADEON(0): Option "MergedFB" is not used > > Accompanied by this, are two monitors both displaying the same picture, > but a scrolling, double wide work area. > > Attached is a complete copy of my log output, and current config, thanks > go to Alex. I know there is a bunch of other cleanup to do in my > config, but I'm just trying to get mergedfb to run right now. Not a radeon (or indeed, a driver) guy, but I can make one suggestion from experience: sometimes, that "bunch of other cleanup" fixes your primary problem; once I fire off the query, I start doing it *anyway*; it's proven productive in many circumstances in which it didn't look like it should. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Sync-On-Green option
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 02:53:25PM -0400, Randy Kramer wrote: > On Monday 01 September 2003 10:50 am, Bonny wrote: > > What is the meaning of the "syncongreen" option which can be inserted > > into a "Monitor Section"? > > My first smart-ass answer is that if you need to ask, you don't need to know. > ;-) Correct. :-) > What I think I know: > > Some monitors have 3 or 4 BNC connectors instead of the 15 pin DIN connector > typical of modern (S)VGA monitors. When there are 4 BNC connectors, the sync > signal must be sent on one of those by itself. If there are only 3, the sync > signal must be combined with one of the color signals, usually green (I > think). > > What I don't know: > > In the typical 15 pin DIN connection, I don't know if sync is a separate pin > or not. > > I don't know if some monitors (15 pin or BNC) require the sync on some color > other than green. VGA connectors (DB15HD) carry the horizontal and vertical sync on separate pins, among other things because the polarity of those signals tells the monitor something (though I don't remember what). Monitors with BNC connectors may have 3, 4, or 5. If they have 5, the sync is separate: RGBHV. If they have 4, it's combined: RGBS. If they have three, it's composite, usually written RGsB, or sync-on-green. It's also worth noting that most large-screen monitors with *only* BNC connectors are fixed-frequency; while you can run them from X slightly more conveniently than from Windows, you *can't* see anything in text mode, unless you configure your machine to boot to the frame buffer... and you *still* won't be able to see anything in the BIOS. I've never seen a monitor where the composite sync was on any other color than green. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] TV-out on radeon 9000
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 06:49:02PM -0400, jeff wrote: > Thanks for the answer. I googled my little head off looking for an > answer, including the 4.3 release notes for the radeon driver and > searches across this list. It would have been nice if somewhere it said > that tv-out wasn't supported by the radeon driver :( > > I switched to the vesa driver and now it works but it really fuzzy > (unfocused) -- even large fonts are unreadable. What's the modeline for > the highest resolution setting that an plain old NTSC-M TV will support? 640x480, or 704x480, depending on your set. If this is a media machine, doesn't your set have an RGB input? :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] (no subject)
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 05:38:36PM +0200, Alain TEULET wrote: [ ... ] >xinit : Connection refused (errno 111): unable to connect to X server > >xinit : No such process (errno 3): Server error. > >xauth: error in locking authority file /root/.Xauthority > > >Thanks for the tip if you can. Are you in an embedded environment, or single user mode, or something equally silly? The problems are because X can't write things in places wherein it reasonably expects to be able to write things. You're Doing Something Weird. :-) Cheer, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Black border around display
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:20:18PM +0200, Anand Buddhdev wrote: > > Most fonts should be fixed by using the GNOME and KDE control panels. > > Mozilla you can fix in "Edit->Preferences", choosing "Appearance" then > > "fonts" in the dialog box and then increasing the font sizes shown > > there. XMMS has a font option in the preferences. Most other apps will > > use your GTK font settings as configured by GNOME. > > Well, I've tried this. In xmms, there is a font setting, but it only > changes the size of the text in the playlist box, for example. The > actual xmms window remains as small as ever, with *tiny* text and > buttons, which makes it hard to click the right one. XMMS, in particular, has a "Double size" switch, which doubles the size of *everything*; my screen's only 8x6, but I run it that way anyway; yes, it's sticky. > Mozilla's font settings also seem to only affect the text it displays > in web pages. However, mozilla's own menu and preferences box uses the > same tiny fonts, that are very hard to read. So for example, the > bookmarks menu item, or the toolbar has very small text. Hmmm... on Windows, NS7's menus and such are only adjustable with the Font Scale control; on Linux, I'd *suspect* there's something in one of the prefs.js files you could twiddle, but I'm not sure what -- mozilla.org might be a better place to look. I smell a MiniHOWTO here... :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Black border around display
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:45:23PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > > I have a new Toshiba laptop with an NVidia-based card. The screen can do > > a resolution of 1600x1200. > > > I tried to use my Gnome control panel > > to increase the font size, and that works for many applications, but a > > number of applications, notably mozilla, and xmms, still use painfully > > tiny fonts. I'd rather go back to using a resolution of 1024x768, which > > is comfortable for me. > > LCDs like on laptops can't really do that. They can scale 1024x768 up to > 1600x1200 and display that, but it's /ugly/. At least in my opinion, > you're much better off just fixing the fonts in everything. Concur strongly. > > Any idea how to "stretch" the display to fill the screen in a smaller > > mode? > > It's often a BIOS setting. Otherwise, no idea sorry - p'haps somebody > with a Geforce*go based laptop can help out There's an "AllowStretch" keyword that's usable with the Chips driver; perhaps it works with the NV driver as well? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] ATI Radeon IGP320M (U1) Dual Head
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 02:58:52PM -0500, Brandon Wittenburg wrote: > The notebook is an hp pavilion ze4430us model. It features a 15" TFT > display. I also have a connected CRT made by Samtron; model 77V. I have > attempted to setup X to display one screen on each of the displays. When > I was working this issue before I was using an unknown monitor as the > secondary display. I could not find any information about it as far as > the HSync and VRefresh goes, and it was a general concensus that I did > not have the values set correctly. Now I have the Samtron, and I know > the recommened HSync and VRefresh rates. However, the connected monitor > does not display an image. IANAXE, but I've never seen a laptop that would dual-head with it's external port. You typically get one, or the other. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Free86 Version 4.3.99.8
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:47:56PM +0200, Alf C Stockton wrote: > > Non of the three things you are seeing are related. > > > > 1. Your startx creates an .Xauthority for you. > > 2. You are seeing the error message because you appearantly don't have > >ipv6. > > 3. You need to check yourself where the start process hangs. > >I'd suggest you start with 'startx'. > >Hint: to trace a shell script you can add: 'set -x' > > > Please tell me more about 'set -x' as it does nothing for me. > I see no more after doing a 'set -x' than I have already emailed, maybe I am > using it incorrectly. To trace a shell script, you can add the line set -x *inside the script, at the top*, and the shell that runs the script will then tell you what it's doing. I usually use -vx -- that way I can see both what variables are supposed to get substituted, and what they take as values. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
[XFree86] Completely OT: Reply-to munging on the list
I'll reply to this, but I know David and others aren't interested, so, guys, feel free to ignore it, 'k? On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:36:29PM -0500, Andy Goth wrote: > Since everybody has a different opinion, I think it would make sense to set up > the mail server so that people can choose whether or not they want Reply-To > fields tacked onto emails they receive. This should make everybody (except > the admin, heh) happy. > > Then only remaining debate would be what should be the default. Existing > users should be set to Reply-To mode until they tell the server otherwise. > > As for new users, the subscribe page should have a checkbox (by default > checked) enabling Reply-To fields. If there is also an email-only way to > subscribe (I don't know), it should by default enable Reply-To, and the > subscription confirmation message should explain the issues and how to change > the Reply-To setting. > > Rationale: My observations indicate that it's mostly people with longtime > experience who complain about Reply-To, so these people should be capable of > follow simple instructions to change their account settings. I'm not sure this will help, Andy: it's precisely those people who will complain because of their knowledge who *don't* need it. It's the *newbies*, who've never been on a list before, and don't realize that they need to look, who are the problem. This is, I think, one of the very rare circumstances where it doesn't really much matter if you supply the knob -- there is no good default. The reason for which, of course, is that one setting of the knob solves one problem, and the other a related, but quite different problem. It is, alas, much akin to the argument between the anti-abortion camp and the pro-abortion camp. Oh, I mean the pro-life camp and the anti-life camp. You see the problem: one side is "pro-abortion-*rights*", and the other side is "pro-life". Two almost completely different topics, tied together by a common base subject. Same thing here. Hitler! Godwin! > It doesn't matter much to me if someone actually implements this suggestion. > If it happens, I'll turn off Reply-To's for mails sent to me. If it doesn't > happen, I won't complain. It may be a little ugly, but I know how to use my > mua to send to the original poster despite Reply-To's setting, so long as > he/she didn't have to set Reply-To in the first place. And your MUA likely has enough *control* to let you deal appropriately, which ties into the "won't help the pros" argument above. > Yeah, I know I said I wouldn't reply, but I think that maybe, just maybe, the > above might lead to a resolution nearly everybody can (grudgingly?) live > with. Hmmm... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:16:17PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth writes: > > Actually, the address for Mr Bateman on the appropriate page seems to be > > dead, I was hoping that either my list posting might drag him out, or that > > Egbert might forward. > > David has other obligations that don't allow him to support the C&T > driver at the moment. Rog. No problem. > > > It is worth trying 4.3.0 if you haven't already, or even something more > > > recent by downloading the XFree86 server and relevant module binaries > > > from Alan's page (www.xfree86.org/~alanh). > > > > Ok, I was wondering -- it's apparently a real pain to get 4.3 RPM's for 7.3 > > (which is the largest thing I can comfortably run on my laptop); Mike isn't > > building for that anymore, and no one else is either... and compiling all of > > X on a P-233... well, I wouldn't even wish that on me. > > I have made a patch now which takes care of some of the problems. > I cannot fix the artefacts that appear in the video overlay once > the video source has a certain size. I assume that this is a > limitation in the HW somewhere. Note, as I mentioned, that this was happening even in non-zoom mode; one source file was 320x200, and still have problems, another 640x480, likewise. > I can send you a binary for 4.3. however I assume that this will > not work for the version of XFree86 that was shipped with RH 7.3. Likely not. A binary of the driver? IE, if I can get a 4.3 built, it will drop in? Sure. > > I guess I'll try to setup a build machine. > > Course, it'll probably take me a month to figure out how to build X from > > scratch... :-} > > That's easier than you think. > 1. You get the tree. > 2. You change into the to directory. Assuming the tree is in your >home: >cd ~/xc > 3. You start the build: >make World > 4. You have some coffee. > 5. Build is done. > > For more information please check xc/INSTALL-X.org Does it build that cleanly these days? No pre-req hell? Cool. That's from the distribution, right; not cvs? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Dual display problems...
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 10:18:51PM -0500, Andy Goth wrote: > On Sunday, July 13, 2003 3:14 pm, Geoff Petzold wrote: > > I have stumbled onto something thsat is interesting... if i move the file > > into my /etc/X11/ directory and rename it as XF86Config-4 then everything > > works fine (ie both screens work the way i thought they would. Thats wierd > > how that when i typed X -xf86config /root/ it wouldnt work... but if ^ > > i move it into /etc/X11/ it works... does anyone know why that is?? > > Shrug. That's weird. I don't think that's the proper command line syntax, is it, Andy? [ looks ] Oh, I'm wrong. It *does* say, though, that only root can use absolute pathnames; Geoff; are you running as root? Is your X server binary, for some odd reason, accidentally setUID to something else, perhaps? > > It works except that it is two SEPERATE desktops... i can move the mouse > > from one to annother but not any windows. If i put the Option "Xinerama" > > into the Xf86Config file my xserver crashes and i have to reset my > > computer so right now i can get the two monitors up and running but > > with two seperate desktops... and i want to know how i can set them up so > > it is one desktop accross two monitors... > > Xinerama problem? > > Why do you have to reset your computer? Do you get a black or garbled > display? Do Num Lock and Caps Lock fail to respond? > > Try crashing X again and then ping your computer from a different host. If > you get a response, then your computer isn't really halted. Then try > telnetting in. See if you can bring down X through the remote shell (first > use kill, and then if that doesn't work, kill -9). Also you might want to > try strace or gdb to see what XFree86 is up to. top can tell you if X is > caught in an infinite loop or similar (~100% CPU time). And try, also, Ctrl-Alt-F1, to see if you can switch back to a text console. If so, it's only X that's hung. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Problems launching X server.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:35:19PM -0400, Oscar Lopez wrote: > Currently I have Red Hat Linux Rel.8.0. installed in a Dell Dimension > 4500 Pentium 4 @ 2.4 GHz and 256 MB of RAM. The system has one hard > drive for Windows XP and a second one dedicated to Linux. The Video card > is NVDIA GeForce4 TI 64MB DDR and the monitor is a Dell 1900FP. > > First of all, I'd like to mention that the system used to work just > fine. > > The problems began when accidentally I turned off the P.C. without > shutting down the system properly. After that day, every time I type > startx, the system displays the following errors: > > (EE) VESA(0): No matching modes > (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration. > > Fatal server error: no screens found > > XIO: Fatal IO error I04 (Connection reset by peer) on X server ":0.0" > after > 0 requests (0 Known processed) with 0 events remaining. > > After trying to reconfigure xfree86 without luck, I decided to format > the hard disk and re-install Linux from the ground, but despite this > action, the problem remains. At this point I have no idea what to do. That the problem persisted over a *reinstall* suggests strongly that it's hardware (unless it started as a glitched Config file and *became* a misconfigured one after the reinstall, which isn't completely beyond the pale...) It's possible, I suppose, that you got lucky with a glitch on the hardware from the turn-off -- especially if the powersupply was more than usually loaded because things were running when you shut it off. You don't mention whether you see any problems under Windows... Is there any chance at all you saved a Config and a log from before the reformat for comparison purposes? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] How to hide the mouse pointer
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 06:47:02PM +0200, Pieter Hulshoff wrote: > > An alternative would be to go back about a day or two in either this list > > or the devel list (can't remember which). > > You are correct; my apologies. I'd been Googling on the topic for about an > hour before I sent my email, but I should have checked the archives first. And I believe the best answer gained there was in fact to use a cursor with no mask. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] xfree crash #1
[ group replied with Mutt since the poster put themselves in Reply-to, presumably so they would *see* the answer... which would deprive the *rest of the list* of my (informative :-) reply. --j ] On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 02:53:22PM -0600, Robert Delahunt wrote: >*** If unresolved symbols were reported above, they might not >*** be the reason for the server aborting. > > Fatal server error: > Caught signal 11. Server aborting If this system has been running ok, and you didn't make any changes before the problem started up, you *may* be running into a tolerance band on some piece of your hardware -- the inside of a PC case is usually 10 to 15 Celsius *above* ambient, and it *is* getting towards summer. ;-) Check out the Signal 11 FAQ at: http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/ for much more than you ever wanted to know about Sig11. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 09:21:18PM +0200, Rene Bartsch wrote: > So I need XDMCP to have an evironment like working directly on the > server. H... Maybe I'm missing something, but XDMCP is the protocol used to offer Chooser-like services to Xterms, no/ > But the problem is power-management and security. To keep current, heat > and noise low I want to use suspend-to-ram on the terminals (and logging > out the user when going to potty, of course). But the tasks and > processes started by the user should go on without additional > user-interaction (withpassword/smartcard-protected screenserver after > five minutes and suspend-to-ram after 10 minutes and moving to another > machine should be possible). And, as I say, the only method of which I'm aware by which you can get what you want is VNC. Or maybe Xproxies on the server to which the clients connect. And VNC isn't fast enough for multimedia. If you run a standard server on the lightweight terminals, I don't know of anyway you can port the connections around. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:57:53AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > He didn't *say* SunRay. > > SunRay is the only way Sun offers that functionality right now, so it was > pretty much implied. You can't do that on a Sun workstation with the software > we provide (though as you noted, you can get similar results with Xvnc). Indeed. It's only implicit if you pay any attention to Sun stuff, Alan. :-) And it's almost completely orthogonal to XDMCP (or X itself, for that matter). Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:39:14PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth writes: > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 02:21:54PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > > I believe that if your mailer doesn't either a) include the RT address in a > > group or b) ask, that your mailer is borken. > > No, I don't think it's broken. > It is doing exactly what is recommended in RFC 822. RFC 2822, s3.6.3, graf 2. It explicitly says that it does *not* control, in either case. So I stand my by (wildly off-topic :-) opinion. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 10:39:18AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > I'm pretty sure it's not 'traditional X'. > > Actually it is. It's the same Xserver that runs on normal workstations. And to clarify -- by "traditional X", I meant server physically located on the terminal, with Lots and Lots of open network streams to it from the clients on whichever servers they're running on. So yes, it is *NOT* traditional X. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 10:39:18AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > >>>On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 03:03:59AM +0200, Rene Bartsch wrote: > >>>>>From SUN I know you can close the X-session without stopping > >>>>processes/programs/window-manager running on the server (just pull off > >>>>your smartcard from one terminal and put it into another one and keep on > >>>>working. The processes and window-manager have kept running in > >>>>background on the server). > > > > Well, that's fine, but if the Xserver is on the terminal, and you want to > > shut it down, I see no obvious way that you can keep all the clients > > connected to it from falling over. I'm not sure what Sun is playing at, but > > I'm pretty sure it's not 'traditional X'. > > Actually it is. It's the same Xserver that runs on normal workstations. > The difference is a SunRay is NOT an X-terminal. It's a graphical dumb > terminal. Conceptually, a SunRay is a video board and USB hub connected > via ethernet instead of PCI/AGP. The Xserver runs on the server machine, > so a server with 200 SunRays has 200 Xsun processes running. He didn't *say* SunRay. That's another thing entirely -- almost exactly the same as Xvnc, from what I understand. > The magic of SunRay hotdesking (moving sessions from one terminal to another) > is that as far as X is concerned, nothing changes. The SunRay DDX handles all > of that. It keeps local backing store (ala Xvfb/shadowfb), and sends updates > to the appropriate SunRay terminal. If you pull your smartcard out of terminal > A, it simply stops sending those updates and only updates the local backing > store. If you then plug into terminal B down the hall, it dumps the entire > backing store to terminal B, then goes back to normal operation sending updates > to that terminal instead. Yeah, that's almost 100% identical to what I set up with VNC for my client. I used NIC's with a slightly modified boot CDROM as terminals, but they're toast now of course -- but any acceptable pizzabox is around the same price. I wonder what *Sun* charges for it? It took me about 12 hours to design *and* implement. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 04:34:07PM +0200, Rene Bartsch wrote: > Am Fre, 2003-07-11 um 02.56 schrieb Jay R. Ashworth: > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 03:03:59AM +0200, Rene Bartsch wrote: > > > I'm running a terminal-server with XFree86 4.3.0, XDMCP and KDE 3.1. > > > > > > >From SUN I know you can close the X-session without stopping > > > processes/programs/window-manager running on the server (just pull off > > > your smartcard from one terminal and put it into another one and keep on > > > working. The processes and window-manager have kept running in > > > background on the server). > > > > > > Is that possible with XDMCP (I want to use power-management on the > > > terminals, so I need it)? > > > > If you need to be able to walk entire sessions around, you might want to > > consider running the session on the server under Xvnc, and just running > > vncviewer to connect to it. > > I want to use XDMCP to have own DISPLAY and integration on the terminals > (e.g. using $DISPLAY Variable to setup soundserver ...), login, ... > > With VNC I would have to start one Xserver on the server for each user, > login management would be complicated and adding additional functions > where I need access to environment varibales, etc. would become a > problem. Additinally 3D-acceleration on the terminals would be > impossible, which rocks fine with Nvidia GLX on XDMCP. So I want to use > the complete Xserver-functions with XDMCP. Well, that's fine, but if the Xserver is on the terminal, and you want to shut it down, I see no obvious way that you can keep all the clients connected to it from falling over. I'm not sure what Sun is playing at, but I'm pretty sure it's not 'traditional X'. Perhaps XDMCP does things I'm not aware of these days, but I hadn't ever heard that that was on the list... Cheers, - jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 02:21:54PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > David Dawes writes: > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 07:05:29PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > > > > >I have just checked the replies on the xfree86@ list. > > >Most of them contain just the [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses. > > > > I can't speak for others, but most of my replies (including this one) > > are like that by design. > > Yes, I know. But this is not the point I was trying to make. > > If Joe Newuser has problems getting XFree86 to run he may send > email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (After all it is advertised all over to > do so), but he doesn't subscribe to the list (It says nowhere that he > should). > One of us wants to anser him, hits 'group reply' and because of the > Reply-To: only containing the list the answer goes only to the list. > But since the original author isn't subscribed he *doesn't* get the > answer. I believe that if your mailer doesn't either a) include the RT address in a group or b) ask, that your mailer is borken. But, third time now: the Answer Gang has *already fixed this problem*. Why isn't anyone interested? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:04:09PM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > > Cause I asked a question (which has drawn *no* replies, BTW -- mostly, > > probably, cause I'd already asked the point guy on the topic and he didn't > > know), and subscribing to follow the answers *is what you do*. I stayed on > > a) waiting to see if someone picked up the questions and b) in case someone > > asked one I could answer -- much the same reason I'm on the Linux Gazette > > Answer Gang. > > Yes, this 'point guy' was me. I tried to help you as good as I could, > however communication was kind of tedious as you emails came back > bouncing with : > >- Transcript of session follows - > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Deferred: Connection timed out with firewall.jachomes.com. > Message could not be delivered for 5 days > Message will be deleted from queue Yeah, DNS problems you can't control suck, don't they? > I don't think you will find anyone else on this list who still has > expertise about C&T chips. > Furthermore I don't think you can complain that I have given you > impolite answers. And you'll note that I didn't -- I went out of my way to point out that you had tried. > I have scheduled to look into the offset problem you are seeing. > However there are more things in XFree86 I need to take care of > so I was not able to do so immediately. Oh. Cool. Thanks. > > > "the internet" has more than one field, by the way. I doubt you're in a > > > personnel/user related area. > > > > Almost all of them in 20 years, except maybe BGP4. *Lots* of front line user > > hand-holding and training, in fact -- including teaching people how to work > > their mail user agents for best effect. So that poor configuration choices > > on mailing lists won't bite *them*. :-) > > > > And between your attitude and David's, I must say, I can see why there was a > > fuss with Keith, and why people suggested that he fork the project. If y'all > > can't be bothered to be polite anymore, go find something else to do, 'k? > > I don't see where David's answers been impolite - or anybody else. > Linking this issue to the discussion about a fork is neither fair > nor productive. > My main intention starting this thread was to point out that many > of those seeking support may never receive an answer. > I had no intention to provoke a general political flamewar. The flamewar was completely orthogonal to my support problem, really. > We instead need a pragmatic solution for our problem - unless > we want to keep making support for the garbage bin. I guess I'll have to pretend I parsed that. In any event, thanks for your help, Egbert. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:26:57AM -0400, David Dawes wrote: > >See? I'm not really a snot. Even though I did ask *about* the cleanest > >question on the list in the 2 weeks I've been here, and got not one answer > >from anyone... > > Unfortunately if Egbert and David Bateman don't have any hints for you, > you might have a hard time finding someone else here who does. I don't > know if the technical docs for the 6 are available, but at some > point you might want to dive into the code and see if you can find the > problem. Actually, the address for Mr Bateman on the appropriate page seems to be dead, I was hoping that either my list posting might drag him out, or that Egbert might forward. > It is worth trying 4.3.0 if you haven't already, or even something more > recent by downloading the XFree86 server and relevant module binaries > from Alan's page (www.xfree86.org/~alanh). Ok, I was wondering -- it's apparently a real pain to get 4.3 RPM's for 7.3 (which is the largest thing I can comfortably run on my laptop); Mike isn't building for that anymore, and no one else is either... and compiling all of X on a P-233... well, I wouldn't even wish that on me. I guess I'll try to setup a build machine. Course, it'll probably take me a month to figure out how to build X from scratch... :-} Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:42:05AM -0500, Andy Goth wrote: > On Thursday, July 10, 2003 5:12 pm, David Dawes wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 04:31:16PM -0500, Andy Goth wrote: > > >On Tuesday, July 8, 2003 12:05 pm, Egbert Eich wrote: > > >> Daniel Stone writes: > > >> > I also hope like hell Mailman isn't munging Reply-To, because that's > > >> > just *wrong*. > > >> > > >> Hm, I don't know what you would call munging, it puts the list address > > >> into the Reply-To. > > > > > >Daniel is probably referring to: > > > > > >http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > > > This comes up from time to time, and has been for years. There's no > > point rehashing that particular matter of personal preference again. > > Sorry I brought it up... :^( I didn't mean to start anything. I just > happened to remember seeing the words "munge" alongside "reply-to" and > thought there might be a reference. I will not reply to this thread again. Don't worry, Andy; it's me they're yelling at. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Re: Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 01:33:10AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > The bare fact is, that reply-to munging flamewar threads have > occured on mailing lists since the first days that reply-to > munging started happening. I must have been on at least 200 if > not 500 mailing lists which have had this exact same flamewar, > and not just once, but several times a year/month, and it creeps > back up again occasionally. Not just on lists like this one > which set Reply-to to the list, but also on lists that *dont*, > where people are arguing that the list *should*. I see the former all the time, as to you. I've only ever seen the latter, maybe twice in 15 years. I'd actually be fairly interested to see the relative percentages. > Regardless of what *any* one person or 500 people think, this is > a completely preferential and controversial issue. As > controversial as abortion, capital punishment, vi vs. emacs, or > whatever your favourite 50/50 split flamewar is. Given safety (which is, admittedly, only an accurate description of the benefit gained on certain types of mailing lists) versus convenience (which is how *I* describe making easier for users something their *MUA* should be making easier for them instead), it seems to be as obvious to me as the smoking in bars issue -- for the smokers, it's only convenience, they're gonna die of lung cancer *anyway*... but the non-smokers *weren't*. It isn't just the convenience issue the smokers paint it as, and they're trumped. > The bottom line, is that 50/50 split flamewars (or any ratio from > about 40/60 to 60/40 or so) end up almost always in the end, > or at least 99.9% of the time ending with no list change > occuring. Changing behaviour pisses off more people than it > pleases, in particular if a list has had a certain behaviour for > a long time. *That* I can't argue with. > As such, it is extremely pointless to demand that a given list > should change it's policy on this issue, regardless of what > datapoints you'd like to raise. You won't raise even a single > datapoint that the list maintainers, and the majority of > subscribers are not already fully 100% aware of. They just > disagree with you, and are not likely to change their line of > thinking no matter how much you disagree or how big of a flamewar > you'd like to make about it. The best you can do, is agree to > disagree and then move on to another topic - or unsubscribe. Pretty sure that I did *not* advocate *this list* changing anything, Mike. Go re-check the thread. Was merely expressing an opinion. > Regardless of how a particular mailing list is ran with respect > to Reply-To, _anyone_ who is bothered by a given list's policy, > can easily change it on their end to suit their own preference. Well, not always. *This* list permits user set RT's to go through, but some lists do *not*, and in that case, your assertion is incorrect. > If you prefer Reply-To to point back to the mailing list, but the > list does not do that, a simple procmail filter which moves any > existing Reply-To to Cc, and puts the list address from From: or > another header into the Reply-To will accomplish that (that's > what I do). Note that the issue here is "what does my message get to *list subscribers* with a RT set to?" -- an item I *cannot* control if the list doesn't permit it. I don't mind having my opinion ignored on this topic on lists... but let's all be clear, shall we? > If you prefer Reply-To: never replying to the list, then have > procmail strip out the Reply-To: header, and optionally munge > From: or CC: to Reply-To to simulate putting it back. Why would I want to bother? If I could run procmail, I'd just run mutt (or, likely, one of the KDE mailers which probably also get it right) and not worry about it. > One thing is fairly certain however - you are very unlikely to > to change long term list policies/preferences to your way of > doing things via flamewar, and not likely via any other > mechanism, so just deal with it, or unsubscribe. Wasn't staring a flameware, Mike; not real pleased that you're trying to cast me as *having* tried to start one... and since the original question was "is there an automated way to make sure the querent gets an answer" and *I've answered that twice, with an offer of code and been ignored*, I reserve the right to be cranky for being bitched at about the issue. 'k? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:16:39AM -0400, David Dawes wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 09:59:02PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > >And between your attitude and David's, I must say, I can see why there was a > >fuss with Keith, and why people suggested that he fork the project. If y'all > > I've been making that suggestion too. Haven't seen anything come > of it yet. Hopefully y'all won't have to wait too much longer. Well, the way *I* heard it played was that the steering committee made noises like it would rather play nice than fork -- which in the long run would probably be a better solution. Fear of Forking, and like that. > >can't be bothered to be polite anymore, go find something else to do, 'k? > >No, really. FOSS doesn't need any bad attitudes, even this late in it's > >evolution. > > If objecting to your misrepresentation of your opinion as "right > vs wrong" is a sign of a bad attitude, then cool. I don't know > why you fail to consider that in a project as old as XFree86 this > tired old issue wasn't considered and dispatched a long long time > ago. It was. I'm sure it probably was, but I don't have time to go through 15 years of mailing list archives, and you *could* have just ignored the topic, and it would likely have gone away. > If you want to look at it as cost vs benefit, the benefit to the > subscribers (and archives) as a whole in maximising the chance that > they'll see all the discussions outweighs the cost of the occasional > misdirected private reply, in my experience over the life of XFree86. > It works for us. Unlike you, I'm not claiming that one solution > is best for all situations. As I noted, yeah, on *this* list, it's much less likely to be an issue. But it's good to make such clarifications when advocating something in that category. Munging the RT violates the Principle of Least Astonishment rather thoroughly, so even if it's a miswart, it's still worthy to be pointed out. IMHO. > As I said in another message today, you can set your own reply-to, > and it won't get overriden, so some of the stuff on Chip's page > doesn't even apply here. Noted. > A warning from the Surgeon General: Mail sent to this list may > be infected by a reply-to header pointing back to the list. Some > experts consider this harmful. The most reliable way to avoid this > potential harm is to unsubscribe from this list. > > :-) To paraphrase Van Morrison: "Just like that..." In fact, that's so good I'm going to forward it to the Considered Harmful guy. ;-) See? I'm not really a snot. Even though I did ask *about* the cleanest question on the list in the 2 weeks I've been here, and got not one answer from anyone... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
[XFree86] Mailing list behaviour and etiquette, in general
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 10:58:56PM -0400, gabe f wrote: > So then, why do you subscribe to the list, you could just read the > emails on the website, > thereby saving all of that internet traffic, by only viewing the email > body text that appealed to you > by its subject, and you wouldn't have to deal with those harmful > vacation auto-replies, either? Cause I asked a question (which has drawn *no* replies, BTW -- mostly, probably, cause I'd already asked the point guy on the topic and he didn't know), and subscribing to follow the answers *is what you do*. I stayed on a) waiting to see if someone picked up the questions and b) in case someone asked one I could answer -- much the same reason I'm on the Linux Gazette Answer Gang. > "the internet" has more than one field, by the way. I doubt you're in a > personnel/user related area. Almost all of them in 20 years, except maybe BGP4. *Lots* of front line user hand-holding and training, in fact -- including teaching people how to work their mail user agents for best effect. So that poor configuration choices on mailing lists won't bite *them*. :-) And between your attitude and David's, I must say, I can see why there was a fuss with Keith, and why people suggested that he fork the project. If y'all can't be bothered to be polite anymore, go find something else to do, 'k? No, really. FOSS doesn't need any bad attitudes, even this late in it's evolution. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 10:19:12PM -0400, David Dawes wrote: > >No, it's that widely held. Been on mailing lists since I had a bang path. > >It's harmful. Believe me. > > It's still an *opinion*. 11 years of dealing with XFree86 mailing > lists have shown me that for everyone who agrees with it, there is > at least one who disagrees. The biggest difference is that those > who agree with it are more likely to be so fanatical about it that > they'll use their last breath to insist that it's a right vs wrong > issue rather than an *opinion*. > > No amount of rehashing this tired old topic will serve any useful > purpose. It's not my list. It *IS* probably a good idea to point out that the list does such munging at the point of signup, though. There have been divorces. No, I'm not kidding. ... Yeah, an X Window list is *not* all that likely to cause a divorce. :-) And actually, no, it's not an opinion; it's a cost benefit analysis. *I* make the costs much higher than the benefits, and *that* is an opinion. A professional opinion; yes, I *do* make a living at this Internet stuff. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Closing XDMCP without stopping processes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 03:03:59AM +0200, Rene Bartsch wrote: > I'm running a terminal-server with XFree86 4.3.0, XDMCP and KDE 3.1. > > >From SUN I know you can close the X-session without stopping > processes/programs/window-manager running on the server (just pull off > your smartcard from one terminal and put it into another one and keep on > working. The processes and window-manager have kept running in > background on the server). > > Is that possible with XDMCP (I want to use power-management on the > terminals, so I need it)? If you need to be able to walk entire sessions around, you might want to consider running the session on the server under Xvnc, and just running vncviewer to connect to it. I've done this for a small (6 seat) client office, and it works quite nicely, though it does up your server requirements a tad (they're using a dual PII-450 Dell Precision 410 with 640MB of ram and 100BaseT -- interactice response times are quite reasonable). Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Would you like to boost your career? i
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > The question is if this could not be automated. If we can agree on > a solution we may be able to find somebody who'd volunteer to > help setting this up for us. Yes, this can be done; this has been done; [EMAIL PROTECTED] uses it and it works nicely; would you like a copy? :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 04:10:58PM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: > > > Hm, I don't know what you would call munging, it puts the list address > > > into the Reply-To. > > > Daniel is probably referring to: > > > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > ... which expresses an opinion not that widely held. No, it's that widely held. Been on mailing lists since I had a bang path. It's harmful. Believe me. Cheers, -- ...!petsd!peora!usfbobo!usfvax2!jc3b21!jc3b22!jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Re: xterm & utmp question
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 06:24:41PM -0400, war wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Thomas E. Dickey wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, war wrote: > > > Slackware Linux 9.0 > > > > on Slackware, utmp is owned by root, so xterm has to be setuid'd to root > > so it can modify that file: > > > > -rws--x--x1 root bin246588 Mar 2 02:52 /usr/X11R6/bin/xterm > > Ah, thank you! I don't suppose I have to explain why that's a Really Bad Approach. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Sample MIME message for online MH book
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 11:43:27AM -0700, Sample MH/MIME message server wrote: > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sample MH/MIME message server) > Subject: [XFree86] Sample MIME message for online MH book > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:43:27 -0700 (PDT) > > > Welcome to MIME mail! > > > This is a sample MIME message for the online edition of the MH book. > The original is on the Web at: http://www.oreilly.com/freebooks/mh/ > There's an updated version at: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mh/book/ Well, obviously, the list is being attacked. Time to start chasing down who's doing it? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
Re: [XFree86] Xpert, Any software just for 15$ - 40$
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 11:03:49AM +0200, Egbert Eich wrote: > At least for me this creates the problem that when I resond to an > email on this list (doing a 'respond all') my mailer only uses the > addresses from the Reply-To: and the Cc: fields. > If the original author hasn't added himself to Cc: and is not > on the list he will not get the reply unless I add it by hand > - which I often forget. > I don't know if any of this can be fixed in mailman but I'm > sure it could be fixed by some mail pre- and post-processing. This is pretty much exactly how the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list works -- you can send messages to it whilst unsubscribed, and it makes sure the headers will include you in the CC list. It's scripted, and quite spiffy. I'm pretty sure it would be available, if y'all were interested in it. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
[XFree86] 4.2.0/Chips 65555/Armada 4220/Xvideo - luminance artifacts & NTSC offset
I'm running RedHat 7.3 (with the supplied xf86 4.2.0, and KDE 3.0), on my new(old) Compaq Armada 4220T laptop, which has a Chips 6, and an 800x600 TFT LCD. I'm trying to get things set up to where I can play movies with gmplayer, and get useful results, and while I've come a long way baby in the last week, I still have two problems left to solve. 1) Whether using mplayer's "enable xv(ideo) hardware zoom" switch or not, I see luminance artifacts in the image, apparently in the midtones. they only comprise about 2% of the image, but they're annoying to look at. They are specifically not blown shadows not highlights -- this isn't an overflow problem (though it might be a LUT loading problem). Though I lose immense amounts of framerate (~20 -> ~4fps), I can run in x11 instead of xv video output mode, and I do *not* get these artifacts there. They also seem to be independant of codec; I've tried 4 or 5 different types of QuickTime files, a couple of MPEG's and a RealVideo -- all the same. I'm running the server in 24 bit -- mplayer says it can't talk to xv if I start the server in 8 bit mode. Everything's pretty much the same, too, whether I'm in 800x600 native or some other mode, which I know because 2) I'm trying to get the otherwise working picture to come out the NTSC scan converter RCA jack on the back of this machine. This doesn't work in a different way: while the video appears pretty passable, it's shifted down and right on a blue background, by 20-25% of screen size. This applies whether I have the panel in 800 native, 640 stretch, 640 non-stretch non-centered, or 640 non-stretch centered. In googling around, I see that non-stretch panning, both on the VGA and the NTSC outputs, is a topic worked on in the last release of driver for Windows from HPaq, so obviously, us Linux people ain't alone. Oh, and occasionally, something mangles the LUT's cause the colors get all turned inside out (my orange gradient background goes to a green gradient, video gets badly mangled, etc)... but this part only seems to happen when I involve the NTSC out. I'd be happy to post (or web-post) the server log and some gmplayer logs, if that would be useful. I'd upgrade to 4.3.x if someone thought that was a good thing to do, but on a 96M/10G P266 laptop, things are a bit tight; if I can avoid a 4 hours compile, I'd like to. If anyone has had any experience with this particular laptop (and/or chipset) and Xvideo, their thoughts would be appreciated. I've already run this with Egbert Eich, who apparently maintains the driver, and we haven't come to much. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Floridahttp://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
