Nqnsome wrote:
Christian Zietz wrote:
I still suppose that your BIOS only recognizes the LCD as a 800x600 one,
while the CRT is recognized correctly as being able to display 1024x768.
The Windows XP driver doesn't care about the BIOS but bypasses it. X on
the other hand needs the BIOS to set the re
Alan Hourihane wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 08:17:07PM -0300, Nqnsome wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > Thanks for answering.
> >
> > Christian Zietz wrote:
> >
> > >I still suppose that your BIOS only recognizes the LCD as a 800x600 one,
> > >while the CRT is recognized correctly as being able
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 08:17:07PM -0300, Nqnsome wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> Thanks for answering.
>
> Christian Zietz wrote:
>
> >I still suppose that your BIOS only recognizes the LCD as a 800x600 one,
> >while the CRT is recognized correctly as being able to display 1024x768.
> >The Windows X
Hi Christian,
Thanks for answering.
Christian Zietz wrote:
I still suppose that your BIOS only recognizes the LCD as a 800x600 one,
while the CRT is recognized correctly as being able to display 1024x768.
The Windows XP driver doesn't care about the BIOS but bypasses it. X on
the other hand needs t
Nqnsome schrieb:
> Sorry to ask that but, if the BIOS is broken, why, under WindowsXp, the
> LCD works in 1024x768? Why, with X11, the CRT works in 1024x768?
I still suppose that your BIOS only recognizes the LCD as a 800x600 one,
while the CRT is recognized correctly as being able to display 1
Hi,
Thanks for your attention. Regarding the BIOS, I am using the latest
version available.
Sorry to ask that but, if the BIOS is broken, why, under WindowsXp, the
LCD works in 1024x768? Why, with X11, the CRT works in 1024x768? Should
not the broken BIOS prevent the LCD from working under Win
Alan Hourihane wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 03:39:28PM -0800, Bukie Mabayoje wrote:
> > Alan Hourihane wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I became aware of this problem few years back (since 2003). The first
> > > > time I experienced it was with a DELL laptop, and I didn't have free
> > > >
Actually,
>From the look of your log file, the 1024x768 mode isn't supported at all
on your LCD. And although your LCD is reported at 1024x768 it looks
like your BIOS is broken.
ModeAttributes should show 0x9b, whereas it's showing 0x9a.
That first bit is dictating whether XFree86 allows the mod
Can you provide a log with that driver ?
Alan.
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:57:38AM -0300, Nqnsome wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tryed your driver, but could not get 1024x768 on the LCD. XFree does
> not see the "Built-in" 1024x768 mode.
>
> Thanks,
>
> S?rgio
>
> Alan Hourihane wrote:
>
> >I've already
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 03:39:28PM -0800, Bukie Mabayoje wrote:
> Alan Hourihane wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > > I became aware of this problem few years back (since 2003). The first
> > > time I experienced it was with a DELL laptop, and I didn't have free
> > > time then to debug it when I actually
Hi,
I tryed your driver, but could not get 1024x768 on the LCD. XFree does
not see the "Built-in" 1024x768 mode.
Thanks,
Sérgio
Alan Hourihane wrote:
I've already done work in this area.
And I've got a driver up at
http://www.fairlite.demon.co.uk/intel.html
if anyone wants to test it.
Alan.
_
Hi,
Thanks for answering.
1)Booting only on the LCD does not work. The XFree output is here:
http://paginas.terra.com.br/educacao/nqnsome/xfree_output_lcd_only.txt
Note that X11 does not find anymore the "Built-in" mode 1024x768, that
it finds when the CRT is attached and I turn off the LCD before
Hi,
are you trying to get dualhead running or clone or just the LCD?
Right now I am (re)trying 1024x768 with only the LCD, but it does not
work, despite the fact that the CRT works under 1024x768.
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Sergio
___
Devel mailing list
Hi,
Thanks for answering.
1)Booting only on the LCD does not work. The XFree output is here:
http://paginas.terra.com.br/educacao/nqnsome/xfree_output_lcd_only.txt
Note that X11 does not find anymore the "Built-in" mode 1024x768, that
it finds when the CRT is attached and I turn off the LCD before
Alan Hourihane wrote:
>
> >
> > I became aware of this problem few years back (since 2003). The first time
> > I experienced it was with a DELL laptop, and I didn't have free time then
> > to debug it when I actually had the laptop. I going to see if I can figure
> > the problem out (why the
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 02:11:48PM -0800, Bukie Mabayoje wrote:
> Nqnsome wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > Alex Deucher wrote:
> >
> > >>Alex is correct. Let focus on the primary display controller on
> > >>PCI:0:2:0 with Display Pipe A and Display Pipe B.
> > >>In your case you ca
Nqnsome wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> >>Alex is correct. Let focus on the primary display controller on PCI:0:2:0
> >>with Display Pipe A and Display Pipe B.
> >>In your case you can only have PipeA=CRT and PipeB=LCD (LFP).
> >>
> >>That is why you have the following
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 06:15:16PM -0300, Nqnsome wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the explanations, but I would like to return to the
> question "why the CRT works under 1024x768 and the LCD not". Can this be
> related to the VESA VBE DCC that does not work on the LCD?
If you boot up on the LCD and ha
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 18:15:16 -0300, Nqnsome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> >>Alex is correct. Let focus on the primary display controller on PCI:0:2:0
> >>with Display Pipe A and Display Pipe B.
> >>In your case you can only have PipeA=CRT and Pi
Hi,
Thanks again.
Alex Deucher wrote:
Alex is correct. Let focus on the primary display controller on PCI:0:2:0 with
Display Pipe A and Display Pipe B.
In your case you can only have PipeA=CRT and PipeB=LCD (LFP).
That is why you have the following information
(II) I810(0): Display Info: CRT: att
SLCB wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks a lot for replaying!!!
>
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> >it should use 02.0. .1 is just a placeholder for the windows drivers AFAIK.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what exactly means to be
> placeholder in this case?
There is a technical mea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:02:37 -0800, Bukie Mabayoje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:03:33 -0300, SLCB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot for replying, really!
> > >
> > > > The 82852GM supports two independent display. Y
Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:03:33 -0300, SLCB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks a lot for replying, really!
> >
> > > The 82852GM supports two independent display. You have one at 00:02:.0
> > > and the other at 00:02.1. You are configured to use BusID
> > > "PCI:0
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:13:17 -0300, SLCB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry, I forgot to comment one answer.
>
> Bukie Mabayoje wrote:
>
> > I suspect the reason it works is that your system have two graphics
> > controller. And one of it is the 350Mhz 24-bit RAMDAC that support a
> > re
Hi,
Sorry, I forgot to comment one answer.
Bukie Mabayoje wrote:
I suspect the reason it works is that your system have two graphics
controller. And one of it is the 350Mhz 24-bit RAMDAC that support a
regular scan analog monitor.
You mean the two BusIds/Pipes or really another card? If I had ano
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:03:33 -0300, SLCB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks a lot for replying, really!
>
> > The 82852GM supports two independent display. You have one at 00:02:.0
> > and the other at 00:02.1. You are configured to use BusID
> > "PCI:0:2:0". I am not sure which video po
Hi,
Thanks a lot for replaying!!!
Alex Deucher wrote:
it should use 02.0. .1 is just a placeholder for the windows drivers AFAIK.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what exactly means to be
placeholder in this case?
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Sergio
--
No virus found in this outgoing messag
Hi,
Thanks a lot for replying, really!
The 82852GM supports two independent display. You have one at 00:02:.0
and the other at 00:02.1. You are configured to use BusID
"PCI:0:2:0". I am not sure which video port 0:2:0 drivers. One thing
you can try is change BusID to "PCI:0:2:1".I suspect the
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:12:01 -0800, Bukie Mabayoje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Read my comments in blue. And I am still looking into this.
>
> Nqnsome wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone help me, please!?
>
> I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as reported by lspci):
>
> 0
Read my comments in blue. And I am still looking into this.
Nqnsome wrote:
Hi,
Can someone help me, please!?
I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as reported by
lspci):
:00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM
Integrated Graphics Device (rev 02)
:00:0
I can't look into this problem tonight I will be able to see if I can help you
tomorrow.
If you need to use your laptop without the external crt, use the vesa driver
for now.
Nqnsome wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone help me, please!?
>
> I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as rep
Hi,
Can someone help me, please!?
I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as reported by lspci):
:00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM
Integrated Graphics Device (rev 02)
:00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM Integrated
Graphics Device (rev
Hi,
Can someone help me, please!?
I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as reported by lspci):
:00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM
Integrated Graphics Device (rev 02)
:00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM Integrated
Graphics Device (rev
Hi,
Can someone help me, please!?
I have a Compal CY27 laptop. The graphics chipset is (as reported by lspci):
:00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM
Integrated Graphics Device (rev 02)
:00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM Integrated
Graphics Device (rev
34 matches
Mail list logo
