[Xpert]Bug with 1920x1440 mode
Hi! With current CVS, if I specify the following Screen section: Section Screen Identifier Scr450AGP_1 Device 450AGP_1 MonitorEIZO_BL DefaultDepth24 SubSection Display Depth 24 Modes 1152x864 EndSubSection EndSection XFree86 actually sets 1152x864 display mode, but uses 1920x1440 virtual screen size. The only solution is to put Virtual 1152 864 into SubSection Display. This wasn't so in 4.2 -- X used the max. *specified* mode as virtual screen size, but now it uses max. *supported* mode instead. I've checked this on G450 and Radeon 7500, so that it is definitely a server's fault, not driver's. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Question about X protocol
Hi! As I understand, when an X server deals with clients having different byte order, it is the server who does LSB-MSB conversion, not the client. Is there any documentation which lists the reasons of that decision? (Yes, I understand that this question probably belongs to a general X list, but xpert list seems to be currently the most authoritative.) TIA, Dmitry _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: 8 over 24 app
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 11:18:55 -0400, Luugi Marsan wrote: For now I'm trying to investigate the support of Overlay in the mga drivers. Correct me if I'm wrong, Overlay is supported for the g-series. If not what are the problems? Right, overlay is supported on g-series as well as on Millenium-II (don't remember about Millenium, but should also be supported). The problem is that sometimes the driver messes and forgets to fill 8bpp plane with colorkey. At least it was so several months ago. I'll try it again with current CVS. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: mga overlay: 8-bit windows turn black + AA fonts in gnomedissappear
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:21:40 +, Steve Salazar wrote: For a while I was working as root (various reasons) now I'm on a user account and the blacking out of the 8-bit windows is back. I've confirmed that with the exact same startx command line `startx -- -cc 4` and the exact same XF86config-4, I do not get windows turning black as root and I do get windows turning black otherwise. Is there a permission I can set somewhere that will make X behave for users as it does for root? EG - no windows turning black. The performance and AA fonts issues I can live with but this blacking out of windows issue makes X unusable for those 8-bit apps. I am using redhat 7.3 with xfree rpm = XFree86-4.2.0-8. My XF86config-4 is below. Steve, there's no difference whether X is run from under root or under uid!=0. There *is* another difference, however: root has a .Xresources file, which affects appearance of xterm and some other proggies, so that probably the blackening bug isn't triggered. The *customization: -color line is worth checking. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: S3 Trio64V+ ( 764/765 ) and Matrox G200 AGP 2X
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:52:57 +0200, Ritchard Nash wrote: 1)If i set in the bios the matrox card as the primary video vard ( init AGP first ) then i can use both cards and all go fine.If i set the s3 as the primary card ( init PCI first ) then when i run Xfree with the same configuration (still mga driver and vesa driver ) the matrox screen (!!) is garbage. In each case the s3 ( vesa driver ) is fine while the matrox works only if is set as first display. I'd like to know if this is a bug ( a known one or unknown ) and if there is something that i can do. I tried to disable DRI , AGP 2x and the various extension but the result is always the same. Yes, it is a known problem at least with G450 -- if those cards are non-primary (I've checked both G450AGP and G450PCI), so that they aren't initialized by BIOS, XFree86 is unable to properly program the chip. Matrox's HAL module *is* able to do the work, but has its own glitches. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]Vertical monitors
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 11:16:10 +0200, Michal Kochanowicz wrote: Thank you very much for your reply! I was almost sure that this will not be possible under Linux... I've TNT2 and am using binary driver but can't find anything about rotating screen... :((( could you please write something more about how to do this? At least mga, nv and fbdev drivers support rotation with 'Option Rotate dir', where dir is either CW or CCW. However, this isn't configurable at runtime -- i.e., what you can do is enable rotation *before* starting X, and that can't be changed during that X session. If you wish to rotate the screen on the fly, you need a RandR-enabled server (RandR stands for Resize and Rotation). Currently RandR is supported only in TinyX (aka KDrive). However, most, if not all, WMs aren't RandR-aware, so they will exibit funny behaviour when the screen dimensions change behind their back. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]Matrox Mystique 200 HELP
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 08:51:54 +0200, Davide Decicco wrote: The specs I am looking for are Matrox Mystique 200 ones, not G200.I know that the file is named : mga-1064.pdf Matrox MGA-1064SG Developer Specification, Document number 10524-MS-0100 February 10, 1997 Can you tell me an e-mail address at Matrox to which I could write to try and have some answer (I've tried with [EMAIL PROTECTED] but no answer came), maybe the one referring to the person you cite Omar Yehia? Yes, that can be a solution. At least this was the addres in the congratulations letter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). BTW, you can try to ask at Matrox's Linux forum (http://forum.matrox.com/cgi-bin/mgaforum/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topicsforum=Linuxnumber=2DaysPrune=1000LastLogin=). Also some time ago Randall Watt from Matrox participated in xpert list, but he have never answered my e-mails. BTW, among the specs which were available at Matrox's devrel site there was a file www1064g.pdf, which has a title Matrox MGA-1064SG Developer Specification, Document number 10524-MS-0100. In case you fail to get this doc from Matrox, I'll mail it to you privately. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]Matrox Mystique 200 HELP
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 11:13:34 +0200, Davide Decicco wrote: Can anyone tell me if there is a way for me to get Matrox Mystique 200 = register level specs? I have tried to register with Matrox, but I only could find Matrox G400= specs. In particular I would be interested in implementing YUV-RGB = conversion and scaling under Linux. Can anyone help me??? Some time ago G200 spec was available at Matrox's developer site. The g200spec.zip contained ext_eclipse_0301.pdf, which was entitled Matrox MGA-G200 Specification. I don't know how much regular G200 differs from Mystique G200. You can try asking at Matrox's site (the person was probably Omar Yehia). I have a copy, but while registering I've signed an agreement to not distribute these docs to anyone. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]mga overlay: 8-bit windows turn black + slow performance
On Thu, 30 May 2002 16:51:27 +, Steve Salazar wrote: I am using 4.2.0. Actually, it is not apps like XMMS that are turning black either. It is the 8-bit apps that are turning black. I never have a problem with the normal 24-bit apps. What is this other bug with overlays that you refer to? (Aside from that fact that the configuration required to make it work is totally different from what the documentation says) I haven't completely investigated the bug yet, but: I've installed RedHat-7.3 (XFree86-4.2.0 with some patches), and if I specify only 'Option Overlay', without '-cc 4' (so that depth of root window is 8), the xsetroot -solid black makes *all 8-bit windows* black, as if clipping isn't performed. However, if there are any 24-bit windows, they aren't affected. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]mga overlay: 8-bit windows turn black + slow performance
On Thu, 30 May 2002 00:04:10 +, Steve Salazar wrote: After much struggle, I have finally gotten my mga card to do overlay correctly (at least for may purposes. However, there still seems to be a problem. Sometimes (when I hover over the gnome panel for example) the 8 bit apps that I have open turn completely black. Minimizing and restoring or otherwise shuffling those windows around causes them to be properly displayed again. Any suggestions? Which version of XFree86 are you running? I had exactly the same problem with 4.0.3 and 4.1, when XMMS and some other apps sometimes became completely black. This was definitely a problem with overlay, when the driver was filling 8-bit plane with some value instead of colorkey. After some correspondence with Egbert Eich the problem was fixed and 4.2 don't have that bug. (But there is another bug with overlay, though...) _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: User-level Tasks in Hotplug Scripts?
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 12:55:41 -0800 (PST), Jim Gettys wrote: OK, folks (both X and wm-spec-list folks, that is, that I've added to this thread): How do we want to solve this problem? We need a secure, interoperable way for configuration scripts running as root to pop up configuration GUI's on user's servers, and we need it soon (yesterday), as hot-plug is now a reality on Linux systems Handling this for the local case is first priority, but we should give some thought about the possibility that the administrator's display is somewhere else in the network (e.g. we're configuring a server system's hotplug event, so the admin is elsewhere). Things to keep in the back of our minds is that we already have Kerberos 5 in the X server and library, so don't dismiss the remote case out of hand. Hi! Maybe the following scheme would suffice: - There's a hotplug daemon, which gets hotplug events from the kernel. This daemon establishes a listening socket with port1024. - When an X server is started by a user which wants to deal with hotplug events, the GUI launches a client, let's name it hotplug commander. The commander connect()s to the daemon and tells him that it wants to receive hotplug events of this, this and this type. - When an actual hotplug occurs, the daemon sends short information packet to all interested commanders. If that action requires some responce from a user, then appropriate password is asked and sent back to the server along with config info (as a variant: the password is asked upon first action, and later that TCP connection is treated by the daemon as authorized). So, the pros: - We have an ability to send hotplug events over a network (but by default the socket can be bound to localhost). - The technology of writing secure network daemons is well known (access control, dealing with bad clients, secure channels, etc.). - No problem of finding out administrator's display and authenticating to it. - The hotplug commanders can be not only GUI apps, but also text-based and even just daemons/robots. BTW, should I cc: to some more addresses? _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: overlay option problem with mga driver
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:44:05 -0800 (PST), napong panitantum wrote: I'm now using RH7.2 with Matrox G450 display card and i try to use pseudo color on true color by adding overlay option in config file. After doing that, Xserver login start but it didn't appear correctly. After tring some solution such as changing mga_drv.o to default of RH7.2 or adding option NoHal, Xserver is appear but at 8 bit color only. Anyone can use pseudo color on true color? what driver are you using? As Andrew C Aitchison already pointed out, you have to start X with a -cc 4 option for 24-bit visual to be default. If you are using xdm, simply change the appropriate line in /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers to :0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X -cc 4 There was another problem with overlay: Matrox driver goofed and filled 24-bit areas with some values instead of colorkey, so that e.g. XMMS window looked completely black. This bug was fixed in CVS in October, so it is probably still present in RedHat 7.2. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: Xfree 4.1, Matrox G-450 Dualhead questions
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 10:50:18 -0800, Tom Manning wrote: I've been reading everything I can find on this card, and there's so much conflicting and outdated info out there I'm getting confused. I'm running Mandrake 8.1 on an older Pentium II, with a BX chipset. **I know some of these questions are newbie type questions, but if I fully understood the howtos and such I wouldn't ask, so please bare with me :-)** I'm considering buying a G450 for dualhead on my machine, but I want to know if I can hook up a 19 (primary) monitor and a 15 (satellite) monitor with few problems, at different resolutions. I've heard that matrox has antialiasing problems with their drivers though. Is that still true? Does anyone have specifics? Can I run it in Xinerama, with one big desktop, at different resolutions? Do I have to, or can I have two separate desktops running, just sacrificing the ability to move windows from one screen to the other? You can easily do what you want. Regarding antialiasing: there were some problems with Render extension (which does antialiasing) in dualhead config, but they are fixed now (don't remember exactly whether in XFree86 or in Matrox's driver). Regarding one big desktop (Xinerama) in different resolutions: this setup will work, but support in some window managers can be lacking. In short: the problem is a presence of a black hole (see picture), +--+-+ | | 800x| | 1600x| 600 | | 1200 |-+ | | -- black hole +--+ which isn't visible on any of the displays and isn't reachable by mouse. The part of the problem is not WMs, but Xinerama-unaware toolkits, which can wish to place some dialog windows into that area. At least FVWM has a feature to move all such windows into visible space. Other Xinerama-aware WMs (I've made a quick survey of almost all of them, except AfterStep) should at least do *their* placement correctly. In short, why would I NOT want to buy this card? The only reason can be 3D, which is not bleeding edge on Matrox. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: MGA G4xx AGP doesn't get soft booted when secondary card
On Sat, 08 Dec 2001 03:14:28 +, Bill wrote: I tried installing a G450 AGP in place of my Rage Pro in my desktop machine at work recently, and was unable to get a picture from the Matrox card. It appeared from the server log that the driver couldn't find the BIOS on the card. I'm unable to make this the primary card as the BIOS in the machine doesn't offer a choice of where to boot VGA from; it's always the PCI card that comes up as primary video. A bit of poking around in the code showed the driver was not actually reading the BIOS, but it wasn't too obvious why; there was (and still is) a comment: Warning! This code currently does not detect a video BIOS It looks as though the code has changed a little since I tried this, but the comment is still there. Is this a limitation of the hardware or could I (or someone who has documentation) repair this? Would it be as simple as changing a few constants to suit the G4xx cards -- is the BIOS signature in a different place, or a little different? I'm not averse to experimenting. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I'm eager to get this to work as the ATI card struggles a little at 1600x1200x32@85 ;o) although it beats some other similar-aged cards I've tried hollow. I'm currently running a machine with G450AGP+G450PCI, and the secondary card (no matter AGP or PCI) is always nonfunctional with XFree86 driver. To solve the problem I had to use Matrox HAL module, which knows how to initialize the card itself. Unfortunately, there are two bugs with HAL module. First, after switching to console and back, the first screen of the secondary card isn't working (according to the monitor, there are some wrong clocks). Second, even with a single-card, the recent Matrox driver makes 2nd head jitter (or whatever the right term is). I really hope that XFree86 support for recent Matrox cards becomes better, but as to now it seems that there is no maintainer for mga driver, and there was no reaction from Matrox. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics Novosibirsk, Russia ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]Re: Most Reliable Card for XFree86?
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 12:35:50 +0530 (IST), Faiz Kazi wrote: I'm putting together a large network of X terminals, and I have the opportunity to pick any card I want for the several nodes. This question is asked very frequently on the newbie list, and we see a lot of opinions. Which are/is the video card(s) that are considered or found to be the most reliable, when it comes to XFree86? Here I mean that all other factors like additional featues, multihead support, AA, super high resolutions etc, take the back seat as compared to pure reliablity and compatibility as factors. Also It should be relatively inexpensive. [SNIP] I wanted to try as many cards and configurations such as mother boards, different X-server versions, etc but I've been only limited to (or have only been exposed so far to) : Matrox G200 8MB SDRAM S3 Virge GX/2 SiS 6326 - 4MB AGP Trident 975 If G200 is available (i.e. inexpensive) for you, go for it. It is very stable. BTW, it also has excellent multihead support, high resolutions, etc. And the quality of the picture is the best among others. As for S3Virge, XFree 4.x support has been a bit lacking for it, but Ani Joshi can tell you more. Can't tell anything about SiS and Trident. There isn't such thing as the best card for XFree 4.x, only a number of opinions. My opinion is that Matrox cards work very well, while ATI ones have features (mainly due to an enormous number of chip versions and subversions) which decrease stability. BTW, one thing to take into account: if you use 1024x768@24bpp (in fact, usually 32bpp), 4M videoram is enough, but 8M is much better since the rest will be used for storing offscreen pixmaps. _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
[Xpert]About G450AGP+G450PCI again
Hi! I have just tested CVS version of XFree86 on the same hardware as in http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/xpert/2001-September/011381.html . Without HAL module CVS has exactly the same problems as 4.0.3. However, with Option Int10 the driver managed to half-initialize non-primary cards. Half-initialize means that the videomode was set up (now videoram size on AGP was correctly identified) and even something resembling X background is visible, but is totally garbled and with bad video effects, and even HW cursor is a random square on the 1st head. Upon exit the 1st head isn't correctly turned off (Nokia 447PRO displays Invalid mode: 160kHz 100Hz). BTW, what is interesting is that after first running X with HAL module and than disabling it, subsequent runs correctly identify non-primary AGP as having 32MB RAM. (Looks like there is some programmable memory size register which is set by either BIOS or HAL.) _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
Re: [Xpert]Matrox G450AGP + G450PCI
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, safemode wrote: #3 and #4 are simply irritating and aren't very serious, #5 would probably disappear with 4.1 (AFAIR, some DRI memory management problems were fixed there). #1 and #2 are cosmetic (however #1 is bad too, why can't memory size be determined?). #0 is serious, since overlay isn't supported with HAL. I believe with matrox, only one card is supported to have DRI at a time. There is a config option to choose this. Upgrade to 4.1 and lose the HAL crap. Have just tested 4.1 on the same machine. Results are almost identical to 4.0.3. I.e., non-primary cards aren't initialized without HAL, MGASDRAM still has to be specified twice, and non-primary AGP is detected as having 2M RAM. However, I have yet to test CVS branch. (What is interesting is that RedHat's RawHide version (I used 4.1.0-0.20.0) of mga_drv.o doesn't support HAL at all -- probably USE_MATROX_HAL was undefined at build time.) _ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
