On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 05:16:29PM +0000, Ged Haywood wrote: > Hi there, Ehlo. :-)
> > If it were really so, where am I to look? > At the bottom of this message. :) I burn with anticipation. :-) > X drivers for the wife's DVDs and I can't say that I'm impressed with > their support for Linux. So I don't personally recommend that source > of hardware although YMMV of course. Well, seems like my M doesn't V too much (see below). :-) Until now I've only had experience with nVidia graphics cards drivers for X. They suck real bad and now that I've even unistalled them and put my Matrox back in I can't get X to use hardware acceleration at all - no idea why. > Yes, things have improved specifically for VIA problems but maybe not > for all of them... I suppose upgrading my BIOS won't help? It's probably all hard-coded in the chipset's firmware, right? > > I'll try to see if it works on my other box, celeron based. > Good plan. Well, to my great relief, the mouse turned out to be fine - it works perfectly, and I'm very glad about it. But for the while I must keep using this Athlon box and I need to get my hands on some code which deals with what VIA people screwed up. Of course if it isn't FUBAR... > > > VIA stuff. Have you tried usb-uhci instad of uhci? > > You mean the 2.4 host controller? Well, as I tried to explain that it > > failed also under 2.4.22. > Yes, I mean the host controller driver. I don't follow what you mean > about it also failing under 2.4.22 but I still mean try both usb-uhci > as well as uhci. Some people have reported better results with one Ah, I forgot 2.4 had two versions of the host controllers. I thought uhci was the name in 2.6 while it was called usb-uhci under 2.4. And now that I remember, I recall trying both. With no success of course. > >just trying diffrent versions of the kernel seems frustrating > Sorry, but I have that T-shirt too. I've crashed more kernels than > you've had hot dinners. :( I take it you also had to resort to trying diffrent versions of the kernel? Some stubborn piece of hardware as well? > There have been changes for better *and* for worse recently in both > the 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. Moreover the code is extremely different Well I understand 2.6 changing code for worse since it's such a large turning point with all the APIs rewritten and all, but why would they make code worse in 2.4? :-) > in the two, so it's not as simple as that. If it were, I think it > would have been patched by now. Yeah, you're probably right. :-( > I'm suggesting you experiment, which might help pin down some of the > things I've been seeing people report. Things like devices that > worked with kernel 2.4.19 and then mysteriously stopped working, or > they worked up to 2.4.20 and then never worked again, or they worked > up to 2.6.1-rc1 and not with 2.6.4, or... Okay. But I'm not convinced to trying it all blind, I'll try searching the web beforehand, now that I know what's the problem's source. > PS: can we try to keep it down to one message per day? :) Sorry, I didn't realize I was bothering anyone in this way. An old Usenet habit I guess. :-) I promise this is the last today. :-) Thank you for such a long and detailed answer. democrux -- - Dariusz Szczepanek ************************ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - - http://censored.by.pwr.wroc.pl/ ***************** (+48)603547472 @ PlusGSM - - 'Cause just like a tree planted - planted by the rivers of water - - That bringeth forth fruits - bringeth forth fruits in due season; - - Everything in life got its purpose, Find its reason in every season, - - Forever, yeah! - ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users
