Subject: Re: [XFree86] VESA modes for Toshiba P25 laptop (GeForce 5200
GO, 1440x900 lcd)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:00:08 -0500
From: Andy Goth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday, July 16, 2003 10:36 am, Christian Convey wrote:
XFree86 Version 4.3.0
CVS? Mine says 4.3.0.1. Release date: 9 May 2003; Build date: 07 June
2003
(Shrug) I dunno. I'm pretty sure, but not certain, that I generated this log file
using the build I made from CVS, rather than the build I got from Mandrake 9.1.
Remember the point was just to show you the VESA modes, not to try to get the VESA
driver working for me. I've basically settled on the nv driver for now, and the
nvidia driver when it comes out.
(By the way, why is there a leading zero on the build date and not the
release
date?)
(WW) Option XkbCompat requires an string value
(WW) Option XkbOptions requires an string value
From your XF86Config-4:
Option XkbCompat
Option XkbOptions
Why do you have these lines?
Cuz that's what Mandrake gave me ;) Remember that I'm an X newbie.
(WW) VESA(0): Bad V_BIOS checksum
I wonder if this is causing us problems.
Yeah, I don't know either. If this means video bios, then who provides it: the
motherboard manufacturer or nVidia?
And which of those two BIOS's contain the VESA mode definitions?
*Mode: 112 (640x480)
*Mode: 115 (800x600)
*Mode: 118 (1024x768)
These three modes (all 32bpp) will fit on your screen. Alas, VESA doesn't
define a 1440x900 mode... unless I'm mistaken, it doesn't do hardware
acceleration, either.
Thanks. I'd really like to get all 1440x900 pixels if I can, however. That's what
I'm using the nv driver right now, and sucking up the problems it gives me with the
virtual consoles.
From XF86Config-4:
Modeline 1440x900 106.47 1440 1520 1672 1904 900 901 904 932 -HSync +Vsync
VESA doesn't use modelines.
(II) VESA(0): Not using mode 1440x900 (no mode of this name)
See? :^)
Thanks for the tip.
(II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode 1280x1024 (width too large for \
virtual size)
(II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode 1024x768 (width too large for \
virtual size)
(II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode 800x600 (width too large for \
virtual size)
(II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode 640x480 (width too large for \
virtual size)
640? Too wide!?
Yup, seems a little odd to me too.
From XF86Config-4:
Subsection Display
Depth 24
Modes 1440x900 #1280x960 1152x864 1024x768 800x600 640x480
EndSubsection
1440x900 fails since there's no matching VESA mode. Then XFree86
appears to
fall back on its no-Modes-list heuristic, that is, find the biggest usable
mode. At least, that's what I think it does---I don't rely on it. Could
someone confirm/correct? But why doesn't it try the 320x VESA modes? Mode
10f would have worked, I think...
(EE) VESA(0): No valid modes
(EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration.
The end.
Does nVidia's proprietary driver work? You said that
XFree86's nv driver
No, nVidia's current proprietary driver doesn't work. I'm waiting with baited breath
for the next revision.
looks good but futzes up the bottom row of text on your screen. Is it an
80x25 screen? What's the character size in pixels? 9x16? What happens if
(Using the nv driver...)
The vc shows me 100 columns and 37 rows (where the last row is the one that's half
chopped off)
I don't know anything about how to determin character size in pixels, or how to
control the fonts used on VCs. Care to enlighten me?
you set a smaller font? Have you tried SVGATextMode? fbcon?
I don't know what SVGATextMode or fbcon are.
Thanks,
Christian
___
XFree86 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
