[Xpert] Re: Radeon QD (7200?) display corruption
I've got the same bug: http://daique.dyndns.org/screenshot/xfree-cvs_20021211.png http://daique.dyndns.org/screenshot/xfree-cvs_20021129.png It's also a 7200, i've sent a mail to this ml 2 times and 1 to martin at xfree86.org (the radeon driver dev I think) but I have no answer. I have to use an old cvs version. Cédric On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 11:15:43PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am experiencing some display corruption, or rather, improper programming of a Radeon QD here on my dual-head setup. I have taken a photograph of the display so you can see for yourself at: http://brian.interlinx.bc.ca/xfree_radeon.jpg The XFree86.0.log is at http://brian.interlinx.bc.ca/XFree86.0.log and my XF86Config-4 is at http://brian.interlinx.bc.ca/XF86Config-4 (my appologies for providing links instead of the actual file contents, but when I tried that a couple of hours ago, the message got held up for moderator approval because it exceeded the 65K limit) I am using the 4.2.99.3 beta release. Any ideas? b. -- Brian J. Murrell ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert] 4.2.99.3 pointer color red?
On Saturday 04 January 2003 06:14, Keith Packard wrote: Around 0 o'clock on Dec 31, Jeff Chua wrote: How can I change red pointer color in XFree86 4.2.99.3? You can switch to another cursor theme with an X resource: Xcursor.theme: whiteglass will select the other theme provided in current XFree86 sources. I'm very interested in getting some more cursors for XFree86 4.3; I keep hoping we'll find someone able to do a better job than me. I've solicited many people without success to date... How would I change the cursor theme on the fly, w/o restarting X? Preferably from within a program. I would like to add that option to KDE's kcontrol mouse module. And then, what do I have to check for to see if the installed XFree version supports those nice cursor themes? Thanx in advance, Fabian ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert] V_BIOS woes
Adam Goode wrote: One last thing I noticed: Sometimes XFree86 prints this: (II) RADEON(0): vgaHWGetIOBase: hwp-IOBase is 0x03d0, hwp-PIOOffset is 0x and sometimes this: (II) RADEON(0): vgaHWGetIOBase: hwp-IOBase is 0x03b0, hwp-PIOOffset is 0x (For the Radeon, hwp-IOBase is sometimes 0x03d0 and sometimes 0x03b0.) The SiS is always 0x03d0. Does this mean anything? At first I thought the Radeon was at was 0x03b0 when it failed, but it turned out that it can be 0x03b0 even when it works (and 0x03d0 when it fails). 0x3b0 is the IOBase for monochrome mode, 0x3d0 for color mode. The fact that the ati driver chooses the monochrome base might have something to do with reading an incorrect MISC register (which is responsible for choosing either color or mono). Perhaps I am mislead myself, but shouldn't this setup require RAC (which is not being used according to the log)? Is the amount of video RAM detected by the SiS driver (4096K) correct? Is there any particular reason for why you're using a mixture of modules compiled for 4.2.1 and 4.2.99? Thomas -- Thomas Winischhofer Vienna/Austria mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** http://www.winischhofer.net ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert] Re: sis620 X (was Re: [Xpert]*****SPAM*****)
The 620 is - as regards the VGA part - compatible to the 530. As far as I know, the 530 (thus the 620) were supported by 4.1 already. 4.3 will bring many enhancements, among others Xv for these old chips. Thomas Andy Isaacson wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 08:28:05AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SPAM: NO_REAL_NAME (-0.3 points) From: does not include a real name You should configure your software to have a real name in the mail headers, and include a useful subject on further mailing list posts. This would help you avoid being labelled as spam. (You also need to get a better ISP, but I can understand that is sometimes difficult.) hello i am trying to run redhat 5.2 on a computer with a SiS620 chipset anyone have a patch for my xfconfig file??? I would recommend getting a more recent Linux rather than attempting to use an ancient version of RedHat. RH5.2 shipped with XFree86 3.3.2.3, which has absolutely no support for the SiS620 (the support appeared sometime before 3.3.6). At best, you'd have to download RPMs for a more recent XFree86; at worst, you'd be recompiling XFree86. Even RedHat 6.x should be able to support the SiS 620. -andy ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert -- Thomas Winischhofer Vienna/Austria mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** http://www.winischhofer.net ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert] RE: [Xpert]FreeBSD 5.0 XFree86 4_2_1 source anyone?
Thanks for the many advices received. I tried the ports (including -4), and it didn't work either. Finally I make clean and pkg_delete -f X and all things referenced by it. I simply used pkg_add and with some amount of configuration I got it working! (Basically same concept as ports, except I found out the two produce vastly different directory structures in the case of XFree86.) I attribute my problem to incompatible header files and libraries, even when using ports. (Residue of older 5.0PR1, 5.0RC, and 4_2_1, then ports, then...) Gilbert John Baldwin wrote: On 31-Dec-2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've cvsup RELENG_5_0 yesterday, make kernel, make world. Then I've cvsup xf-4_2_1 into another source directory, make World, make install. make World gave warnings of no big big integers, but completed. make install failed because the FreeBSD.cf supplied apparently called for ansic.inc version that's different. [all names above I recall from memory, maybe slightly off..] Question: anyone has include file or source or patch or instruction to make above combination work? I'm guessing it's because 5.0 uses gcc 3.2.1 and not 2.9 anymore, and include files changed... If above combination is not good, any suggestions? I'm starting off with a new hard drive, though I'm sort of committed now using FreeBSD 5.0. (I also have it dual boot to Windows and Linux.) As came with the cvsup, the ports supplied is Xfree86 3.3.6... If you go to /usr/ports/x11/XFree86-4, you can build X 4.2.1 from source that way and it should work fine. That's how I build X on my laptop running FreeBSD-current. ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert] Make World fails building pswrap with BuildServersOnly
I am trying to build a 4.2.1 release of XFree86 (XDirectFB actually) and getting an error when I try to configure it to build the Xserver only. I have BuildServersOnly defined, but when I try to make World, I get a failure trying to build pswrap: $ make World ... cd ./config/pswrap make pswrap DEFINES= make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/RPM/BUILD/XFree86-4.2.1/xc/config/pswrap' make[1]: *** No rule to make target `pswrap'. Stop. make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/RPM/BUILD/XFree86-4.2.1/xc/config/pswrap' make: *** [World] Error 2 make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/RPM/BUILD/XFree86-4.2.1/xc' The problem seems to be that the Makefile in xc has the following for the World target: World: ... cd $(IMAKESRC) $(MAKE) $(FLAGS) clean $(MAKE) $(MFLAGS) Makefile.boot $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) VerifyOS $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) version.def $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) Makefiles $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) BOOTSTRAPSUBDIRS= clean cd $(CONFIGSRC)/pswrap $(MAKE) pswrap DEFINES= $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) includes $(MAKE) -C $(CONFIGSRC)/util gccmakedep $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) depend $(MAKE_CMD) $(MFLAGS) $(WORLDOPTS) World @echo @date @echo @echo Full build of $(RELEASE) of the X Window System complete. @echo Notice that make World directly specifies that pswrap be built (cd $(CONFIGSRC)/pswrap $(MAKE) pswrap DEFINES=). However, the Imakefile in config (the parent directory to pswrap) has the following in it: #if BuildDPSLibrary PSWRAPDIR = pswrap #endif SUBDIRS = cf $(BOOTSTRAPSUBDIRS) util $(PSWRAPDIR) which causes pswrap to be ignored (because it is only in SUBDIRS conditional on BuildDPSLibrary) when making Makefiles, etc. if BuildDPSLibrary is false. BuildDPSLibrary is false because in xc/config/cf/X11.tmpl there is the following: #define BuildDPSLibraries !BuildServersOnly So it seems that pswrap is mutually exclusive of building a server only, but the toplevel make World target wants to build it, unconditionally. So I pressume I must be doing something wrong. I am sure I am not the first person to want to build a BuildServersOnly configuruation. Is make World the wrong target to call to simply build (a) server(s)? b. -- Brian J. Murrell msg11925/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
