Re: [gentoo-user] X.org V7.0 partial success

2006-01-12 Thread Matthias Bethke
Hi Richard, on Wednesday, 2006-01-11 at 18:22:37, you wrote: I think it is important to note that these names were not invented by the Gentoo devs working the ebuildsthey are straight from the x.org project's distribution [1]. Ah, OK, thanks for clarifying that! After reading their

[gentoo-user] X.org V7.0 partial success

2006-01-11 Thread Matthias Bethke
I used xorg-x11-6.8.99 on my laptop so far because its i915 chipset wasn't properly supported in 6.8.2. Now the last update, -r4, broke the support again (or so I read on some forum when I investigated why X wouldn't start any more), so I decided to give 7.0 a try. The usual great Gentoo HOWTOs

Re: [gentoo-user] X.org V7.0 partial success

2006-01-11 Thread Andrew Frink
On 1/11/06, Matthias Bethke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I used xorg-x11-6.8.99 on my laptop so far because its i915 chipsetwasn't properly supported in 6.8.2. Now the last update, -r4, broke thesupport again (or so I read on some forum when I investigated why Xwouldn't start any more), so I decided

Re: [gentoo-user] X.org V7.0 partial success

2006-01-11 Thread Matthias Bethke
Hi Andrew, on Wednesday, 2006-01-11 at 16:27:41, you wrote: try adding 'Section DRI mode 0660 Group video endsection' to your xorg.conf Oh, that rings a bell, I think I did that to another config a long time ago...thanks, I'll try tomorrow @work! and no those are

Re: [gentoo-user] X.org V7.0 partial success

2006-01-11 Thread Richard Fish
On 1/11/06, Matthias Bethke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yup, I figured that was the motivation---but X.org and XFree86 are still different projects with different code and all, so I was surprised that the name starts in xf86- and the description says X.org... Wouldn't xf86-something indicate a