It seems that old bits of memory have been put onto the screen (as I am probably the last person to realise), when the screen is in pixel-lines. The two examples of this I have are the xf86cfg graphics going into the pixel-lines after using it without adding the "-textmode". The other, more recent example is a banner of repititions of the win95 startup logo in pixel-lines (yuck). This one happens if I just reboot after being in DOS7.0, even though the win95 logo doesn't come up in DOS (I don't have the actual logo file, but a backup of it in io.sys).
But even after all this time playing with XF86Config-4, I _still_ haven't been able to get X working. I still only get pixel-lines, black with random white pixels, or an error message about no screens found. I have tried doing about all I could think of. If this continues much longer, I think I'll try to downgrade. But one thing that is _really_ getting to me is the difference between the logfiles. As I had previously wrote: > It's somewhat interesting to notice a difference between the logfiles when > testing the configurations from each method. In the logfile from testing the > "X -configure" is... > > (==) CHIPS(0): Min pixel clock is 11.000MHz > (--) CHIPS(0): Max pixel clock is 56.000MHz > > ... and from the "xf86cfg -textmode" method... > > (==) CHIPS(0): Min pixel clock is 5.500MHz > (--) CHIPS(0): Max pixel clock is 28.000MHz > > The lines preceded by (==) are default values and the (--) lines are probed > values. This is interesting, I would have thought that the values would be > the same. What sort of effect could this have? I have been spending my time with XF86Config-4, is there some other file that I should try changing? Thanks for any help, Seneca [EMAIL PROTECTED]