> I also tried 9pcatom, and the performance is
> great there as well. The only complaint I would
> have here is that usbd on 9atom starts up too
> late - after inputting boot, root, vga, etc. information.
> So I have to go back and forth between my laptop
> and keyboard.
just recompile the kernel
It is indeed weird that we see two video devices.
I'm still not sure what that's about.
But just for the record, I've updated to the latest
9pc kernel (build on Oct. 12, 2011 iirc), and the
performance is far better. :-)
I also tried 9pcatom, and the performance is
great there as well. The only c
sorry for the slow response. vacation. i'll try
to look at this today. but my time is being consumed
by a puppy, so my bandwidth might be poor.
one thing i notice is that there are two different video devices.
that's kind of wierd.
- erik
Stanley Lieber wrote:
> erik quanstrom wrote:
>> i think most people are using vesa. unfortunately
>> that limits one to 4:3 graphics modes.
>
> Some card/monitor combinations seem to support other aspect ratios
> that are technically outside of the VESA spec
I confirm, I use 1920x1280x32 with ve
I will also try 9atom.
Here is the `pci -v' output:
0.0.0: brg 06.00.00 8086/2a40 0
Intel Corporation
0.2.0: vid 03.00.00 8086/2a42 11 0:f204 4194304 1: 16 2:d00c
268435456 3: 16 4:1801 16
Intel Corporation Mobile Intel 4 Series Chipset Family I
On Tue Dec 20 23:57:09 EST 2011, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
> I have tried 1280x800x32 on the laptop and
> 1280x1024x16 and 1280x1024x32 on a monitor
> connected to the laptop via VGA. In all cases,
> the result is a very, very incredibly slow and
> choppy rio.
>
> I'm using the stock Plan
I have tried 1280x800x32 on the laptop and
1280x1024x16 and 1280x1024x32 on a monitor
connected to the laptop via VGA. In all cases,
the result is a very, very incredibly slow and
choppy rio.
I'm using the stock Plan 9 kernel (with a patch
for IL (*shakes fist at the 'Labs*)).
ak
On Tue, Dec 20
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:03 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> i never considered the advertized modes might depend on
> the monitor connected. have you observed this?
Yes. I have a few combinations of VGA-VGA, DVI-DVI, VGA-DVI, DVI-HDMI,
etc., cables, and, using the same card and monitor, I get dif
> Some card/monitor combinations seem to support other aspect ratios
> that are technically outside of the VESA spec. For example, my NVidia
> GeForce 8400GS coupled with an NEC AccuSync AS221WM 22" via DVI-D[1]
> happily runs[2] at the monitor's native resolution of 1680x1050 with
> VESA, which is
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 7:52 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
> i think most people are using vesa. unfortunately
> that limits one to 4:3 graphics modes.
Some card/monitor combinations seem to support other aspect ratios
that are technically outside of the VESA spec. For example, my NVidia
GeForce 840
On Tue Dec 20 02:41:29 EST 2011, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
> My Thinkpad X200s has an Intel X4500 card,
> but vga(3) defaults to using vesa. Has anyone
> added any support for this card lately? Or is
> there any other vga `type' that can be set in
> /dev/vgactl, which would offer better
>
11 matches
Mail list logo