On Jul 08 10:19:18, chrisbenn...@bennettconstruction.us wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 07:59:10AM +0200, Jan Stary wrote:
> > On Jul 06 11:06:54, chrisbenn...@bennettconstruction.us wrote:
> > > > vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 "ATI Radeon Mobility M6" rev 0x00
> >
> > > > Xorg.0.log:
> > > > [
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 07:59:10AM +0200, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Jul 06 11:06:54, chrisbenn...@bennettconstruction.us wrote:
> > > vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 "ATI Radeon Mobility M6" rev 0x00
>
> > > Xorg.0.log:
> > > [ 128.407] (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.so
> > > [
On Jul 06 11:06:54, chrisbenn...@bennettconstruction.us wrote:
> > vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 "ATI Radeon Mobility M6" rev 0x00
> > Xorg.0.log:
> > [ 128.407] (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.so
> > [ 128.453] (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/vesa_drv.so
> [
I have KDE installed but I don't use it.
I tried using KDE, but still same problems.
Chris
On Jun 29 11:12:50, mhe...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:45:08AM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Callum Davies wrote:
> > > I'm also not an X hacker but nv should use EXA since ~2007?
> >
> > "should"? No, not if you believe nv(4). "Can"? It
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:45:08AM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Callum Davies wrote:
> > I'm also not an X hacker but nv should use EXA since ~2007?
>
> "should"? No, not if you believe nv(4). "Can"? It would seem so.
> "Does by default, or at least if XAA
On 27 June 2013 07:29, f5b wrote:
> Found similar problems,
> big dimension images webpage cause CPU grow up to 95% in Xorg process in
> recent snapshots
> but 5.3 release Xorg process only use 3% of CPU
>
> how to repeat the problem
> while using firefox browsing a web page
> this page have onl
Found similar problems,
big dimension images webpage cause CPU grow up to 95% in Xorg process in recent
snapshots
but 5.3 release Xorg process only use 3% of CPU
how to repeat the problem
while using firefox browsing a web page
this page have only thress pictures
1. 4000x2448 1,521,707 bytes
On Jun 25 10:45:08, guent...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Callum Davies wrote:
> > I'm also not an X hacker but nv should use EXA since ~2007?
>
> "should"? No, not if you believe nv(4). "Can"? It would seem so.
> "Does by default, or at least if XAA isn't available"?
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Callum Davies wrote:
> I'm also not an X hacker but nv should use EXA since ~2007?
"should"? No, not if you believe nv(4). "Can"? It would seem so.
"Does by default, or at least if XAA isn't available"? Doesn't seem
so. Setting
Option "AccelMethod" "EXA"
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 06:24:06PM +0100, Callum Davies wrote:
> On 25/06/2013 08:58, Philip Guenther wrote
> >I'm no X hacker, but I think the 'nv' driver was affected by Xorg
> >removing the XAA acceleration framework from the core server. It was
> >an evolutionary dead-end, apparently, so don't
On 25/06/2013 08:58, Philip Guenther wrote
I'm no X hacker, but I think the 'nv' driver was affected by Xorg
removing the XAA acceleration framework from the core server. It was
an evolutionary dead-end, apparently, so don't expect X-server-side
acceleration to be coming back like that; client s
On Jun 25 00:58:41, guent...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> > Noticing the recent inteldrm debate, I looked for that,
> > but my graphic device is an NVIDIA.
>
> I'm no X hacker, but I think the 'nv' driver was affected by Xorg
> removing the XAA accelerat
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> Noticing the recent inteldrm debate, I looked for that,
> but my graphic device is an NVIDIA.
I'm no X hacker, but I think the 'nv' driver was affected by Xorg
removing the XAA acceleration framework from the core server. It was
an evolutionar
On Jun 24 20:09:05, amitk...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Jan Stary wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 24 08:56:09, guent...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Lots has changed in the last year. Without knowing what "before" time
> > > > you're comparing against, your real question can't be answ
I uploaded two images to:
http://www.bennettconstruction.us/images/OpenMenuCorrupted.jpg
http://www.bennettconstruction.us/images/DateCorrupted.jpg
This effect is happening all over, including in URL bar for firefox.
Xterm is fine. :)
Chris Bennett
I have also been having problems for several snapshots.
I have seen lines in firefox for quite a while.
But now I see blocky lines in all open menus and other places.
These go away if I highlight the area.
When I click open in a menu, I also see some of the other items get the blocks
just
before t
> On Jun 24 08:56:09, guent...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Lots has changed in the last year. Without knowing what "before" time
> > you're comparing against, your real question can't be answered.
>
> Before means about three weeks ago.
> Sorry for nto being specific.
>
> > Meanwhile, a comparison of d
On Jun 24 12:48:56, h...@stare.cz wrote:
> With recent snapshots (i386), the overal X/cwm response
> seems to bee much slower than before. Has something
> fundamental changed in X or cwm?
>
> For example, moving a browser window a notch with Alt-L,
> I can see the individual lines of text being re
Running a new snapshot now, not seeing any slowdown, installed 21
June.
OpenBSD envy.blackhelicopters.org 5.3 GENERIC.MP#8 i386
==ml
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:48:56PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote:
> With recent snapshots (i386), the overal X/cwm response
> seems to bee much slower than before. Has so
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> With recent snapshots (i386), the overal X/cwm response
> seems to bee much slower than before. Has something
> fundamental changed in X or cwm?
Lots has changed in the last year. Without knowing what "before" time
you're comparing against, you
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:48 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> With recent snapshots (i386), the overal X/cwm response
> seems to bee much slower than before. Has something
> fundamental changed in X or cwm?
>
> For example, moving a browser window a notch with Alt-L,
> I can see the individual lines of text
With recent snapshots (i386), the overal X/cwm response
seems to bee much slower than before. Has something
fundamental changed in X or cwm?
For example, moving a browser window a notch with Alt-L,
I can see the individual lines of text being redrawn
in a slow-motion movie ...
Jan
Open
23 matches
Mail list logo
