Could anyone explain to me what the attached log means?
X 7.5 detects a rich array of BIOS modes, but then runs through a list
of modes and says "no mode of this name". Should it be using something
like "104" or "104 (1024x768)" instead of, e.g., "1024x768"? Then X
tries a less strict probe, an
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Peter Hutterer
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:29:12PM -0700, David Mohr wrote:
>> I'm part of the minory who currently uses a Zaphod style dual monitor
>> setup with separate X screens for every monitor. When I recently
>> upgraded from 7.4 to 7.5, some utili
Sheesh. I suppose I should have expected something like that, it's
Windows after all. I keep wanting to use Windows less and less.
>Make sure you've set download type to Binary in the WinXP FTP client.
>IIRC, it's Text by default, which would mangle the tarball.
paulgrog...@lycos.com
TANSTAA
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:29:12PM -0700, David Mohr wrote:
> I'm part of the minory who currently uses a Zaphod style dual monitor
> setup with separate X screens for every monitor. When I recently
> upgraded from 7.4 to 7.5, some utilites which I adopted[1] which
> manipulate the mouse cursor sta
Hi everyone,
I'm part of the minory who currently uses a Zaphod style dual monitor
setup with separate X screens for every monitor. When I recently
upgraded from 7.4 to 7.5, some utilites which I adopted[1] which
manipulate the mouse cursor started malfunctioning. My two X screens
are setup to be "
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 09:18:35PM -0800, Corbin Simpson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
> > Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> >> On the client side we've pretty much preserved API & ABI compatibility,
> >> even
> >> when that required major gyrations for the XCB effort - wh
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> On the client side we've pretty much preserved API & ABI compatibility,
>> even
>> when that required major gyrations for the XCB effort - while we
>> encouarage
>> migration to the new XCB libraries, it will be a c
On Sunday 28 February 2010, paul rogers wrote:
>Sunday afternoon, using WinXP's ftp client
You may want to try it with a real ftp client, that one isn't. From my
admittedly limited experience, its borked, thinks binary files are text &
helpfully translates them to winders style line endings.
B
On Mar 1, 2010, at 11:34 AM, paul rogers wrote:
> Sunday afternoon, using WinXP's ftp client I downloaded everything from 7.5's
> everything/* using mget. All the files are corrupt, using "tar -tjvf ..." in
> some cases after showing the first file in the archive. The md5sums for
> several I s
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Corbin Simpson wrote:
Admittedly, I'm kind of young, but I had to go Google all the other
extensions to even get a hint of what they do. That's probably not a
good sign. :3
You will undoubtedly not be the only X developer who is younger than some
of this code.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:34 PM, paul rogers wrote:
> Sunday afternoon, using WinXP's ftp client I downloaded everything from
> 7.5's everything/* using mget. All the files are corrupt, using "tar -tjvf
> ..." in some cases after showing the first file in the archive. The md5sums
> for several I s
Sunday afternoon, using WinXP's ftp client I downloaded everything from 7.5's everything/* using mget. All the files are corrupt, using "tar -tjvf ..." in some cases after showing the first file in the archive. The md5sums for several I spot checked didn't match either. In same session I succes
Corbin Simpson wrote:
> Admittedly, I'm kind of young, but I had to go Google all the other
> extensions to even get a hint of what they do. That's probably not a
> good sign. :3
You will undoubtedly not be the only X developer who is younger than some
of this code. Even with everything that's b
Richard Brown wrote:
> I would be interested in the rationale to disable extensions. "This
> isn't needed anymore" is not good enough. Assume that there is someone
> still using the extension, somewhere, an older program that needs it.
> Perhaps, if the extension required rewriting of thousands of
Posting w/o quotes because, frankly, there's a lot of text here.
MIT-Sundry-Nonstandard never was on any Xorg server I can recall; I
remember UT2k4 bitched bitterly at me over it, back when I was still
an fglrx user. Google and git suggest that it's been disabled since
before 2006 and was finally
David Gerard wrote:
On 1 March 2010 01:28, Richard Brown wrote:
Russell Shaw wrote:
What are you referring to by "Ximage" ?
Ximage extension to the X server. It has been superceded by MIT shared
memory. However, some ancient apps may still use it.
It's not clear that *anyone* ever mana
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 08:25:12PM -0500, Richard Brown wrote:
>
> I do apologise for the tone of my original letter. We will be staying
> with X in the future and we will not be moving to another platform.
Your large corporation certainly has a lightning fast decision making
process.
Luc Verh
On 1 March 2010 01:28, Richard Brown wrote:
> Russell Shaw wrote:
>> What are you referring to by "Ximage" ?
> Ximage extension to the X server. It has been superceded by MIT shared
> memory. However, some ancient apps may still use it.
It's not clear that *anyone* ever manage to use it succes
Russell Shaw wrote:
Richard Brown wrote:
Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 19:05:25 28.02.2010 UTC-05 when rbrown1...@gmail.com
did
gyre and gimble:
RB> So of these disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are
RB> disabled as a result of actual broken code, vs, how many are
RB>
Alan Cox wrote:
disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are disabled as a result
of actual broken code, vs, how many are disabled because, "we don't like
how it looks"?
Most are disabled because they don't work (and often havent worked for
ages, or have been disabled by distributi
Richard Brown wrote:
Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 19:05:25 28.02.2010 UTC-05 when rbrown1...@gmail.com did
gyre and gimble:
RB> So of these disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are
RB> disabled as a result of actual broken code, vs, how many are
RB> disabled because, "we
> disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are disabled as a result
> of actual broken code, vs, how many are disabled because, "we don't like
> how it looks"?
Most are disabled because they don't work (and often havent worked for
ages, or have been disabled by distributions by default fo
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 05:48:50PM -0500, Richard Brown wrote:
> Dear X.org,
>
> I work for a large corporation which has used X Window System in its
> internal systems since the 1980s. We have code going back to since the
> mid 80s which has used X which are a critical part of our corporations
Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 19:05:25 28.02.2010 UTC-05 when rbrown1...@gmail.com did
gyre and gimble:
RB> So of these disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are
RB> disabled as a result of actual broken code, vs, how many are
RB> disabled because, "we don't like how it loo
Twas brillig at 19:05:25 28.02.2010 UTC-05 when rbrown1...@gmail.com did
gyre and gimble:
RB> So of these disabled, removed extensions. How many of these are
RB> disabled as a result of actual broken code, vs, how many are
RB> disabled because, "we don't like how it looks"?
Most of them were
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Richard Brown wrote:
Our applications make extensive use of a large number of X extensions,
these include, but are not limited to, MIT-Sundry-Nonstandard (many of
our oldest programs from the early days use this) ,TOG-CUP, Xtrap,
Xfree86-Misc, XEvIE, EVI, PEX, (for man
Alan Cox wrote:
To our much dismay we have recently found after attempting to install
new Linux boxes that these extensions no longer appear to be available.
PEX was dropped in what was it 2004, so six years ago... taken you a
while to notice and it was dropped because nobody could
Alan Cox wrote:
>>> To our much dismay we have recently found after attempting to install
>> new Linux boxes that these extensions no longer appear to be available.
>
> PEX was dropped in what was it 2004, so six years ago... taken you a
> while to notice and it was dropped because nobody could
>> To our much dismay we have recently found after attempting to install
> new Linux boxes that these extensions no longer appear to be available.
PEX was dropped in what was it 2004, so six years ago... taken you a
while to notice and it was dropped because nobody could actually find a
single u
Richard Brown wrote:
> Our applications make extensive use of a large number of X extensions,
> these include, but are not limited to, MIT-Sundry-Nonstandard (many of
> our oldest programs from the early days use this) ,TOG-CUP, Xtrap,
> Xfree86-Misc, XEvIE, EVI, PEX, (for many of our 3D modelling
Can I ask what OSes you have been running on previously?
Dave
sorry for top posting phone email client
On Monday, March 1, 2010, Richard Brown wrote:
> Dear X.org,
>
> I work for a large corporation which has used X Window System in its internal
> systems since the 1980s. We have code going bac
Dear X.org,
I work for a large corporation which has used X Window System in its
internal systems since the 1980s. We have code going back to since the
mid 80s which has used X which are a critical part of our corporations
internal infrastructures and information systems. We have dozens of
ap
32 matches
Mail list logo
