Hi, I am afraid I don't remember whether you are using a CRT or a flatscreen (laptop or whatever...) Basically if you use a CRT the logic is that the first resolution of the mode line is the default. However, (I don't remember quite well there I had these problems some time ago and don't feel like testing and being faced with them again) I believe that the virtual resolution is the largest of the line unless specified somewhere else (check whether you have "virtual 1024x768" (without the quotes) some place, if so remove it just gives one headackes) my solution is the one you discovered yourself: only one resolution... basically, if the only resolution is 800x600 and you don't have a virtual resolution somewhere it should behave as you expect. If you have a LCD (flat panel or laptop) you should remember that these have only ONE physical resolution. Anything else is a more (seldom) or (often) less good interpolation. which may be why X has a tendency to select automatically the physical resolution. Lionel --- Bill Wraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Lionel, > > Yes, I was able to generate a reasonable file using XFree86 -configure. The test >they use also > seems > to have its problems. The change I had to make to the the file generated by XFree86 >-configure > was to > remove all but one 1024x768 mode in any color depth and then set the default color >depth. For > some > reason, the 1024x768 mode must be the first one listed for it to work. If it is the >second one > listed, > even with all other params the same, it misbehaves. I can't seem to get any other >resolutions to > work. > I wondered if you could suggest what else might have to be added, or what tools to >look at, to > get a > lower resolution mode to work. I see there are no mode lines in the generated file, >and I > wondered if > I somehow have to do something about that. The symptom when a resolution doesn't >work is that > various > parts of the screen show up in the wrong place, and it seems like I can "pan" the >entire bit > map, as > if it were much bigger than the size of the display. It would be great to understand >a little > more > about how to zero in on proper settings, as so far my whole process has been trial >and error > based on > a few guesses from looking at config files I've found on the web. > > Thanks, Bill Wraith > > Lionel Lecoq wrote: > > > Hi Bill, > > I always reverse the two arguments (knowing it I "corrected" my -for once correct- > command...), I > > was not on my box... > > As to Xconfigurator, I NEVER test the monitor after experiencing the same thing as >you did > many > > times: it is not really necessary. I also did read someplace that one should let >good alone > and > > not test it... (to be fair to RH, I did test it once or twice with success >-evening late when > I > > don't control my finger too well anymore and accept the test) > > Most people prefer XFree86 -configure to Xconfigurator (also Xconfigurator is RH >specific I > > believe). One of the salient differences between the two programs is that XFree86 >creates > > /root/XF86Config.new which you must then rename and move to /etc/X11. >Xconfigurator creates > both > > XF86Config and XF86Config-4 and put them in /etc/X11 i.e. you MUST backup if you >have a > > functioning config. > > Good luck > > Lionel > > > > --- Bill Wraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Lionel, > > > > > > Please note that the ln -s command should have the last two params reversed, >just in case > > > someone > > > else sees the directions below. > > > > > > Thanks for this advice. I made the change and got it to work. However, I did >have one > problem. > > > When > > > I ran Xconfigurator, it kept switching the link right back to XF86_SVGA. >However, if I don't > run > > > Xconfigurator, it seems to load up version 4, and somehow, the XF86Config-4 had >the right > stuff > > > in > > > it, in particular the reference to s3virge driver in device section. I wonder if > Xconfigurator > > > created a "suggested" version 4 config, even though it insisted on putting the >3.3.6 link in > > > etc/X11/X. > > > > > > I tried using Xconfigurator --preferxf4, which does seem to leave the link in >place, but it > > > hangs > > > during the monitor test after painting the gray screen with the large "x" cursor >in the > center. > > > It > > > doesn't ever seem to get to the point where it puts up the finer resolution >window, asking > if > > > you > > > can see it. Nevertheless, the file it generates does seem to work with an >xstart. I find > this > > > pretty > > > strange and wondered if you could give me any clues about how to make >Xconfigurator work. > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of > > your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com > > or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Newbie mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > *** To unsubscribe , or change message options, see: > > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/newbie > > > _______________________________________________ > Newbie mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** To unsubscribe , or change message options, see: > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/newbie
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Newbie mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** To unsubscribe , or change message options, see: http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/newbie
