Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:01:18 -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: You are a prick. I don't know what his problem was but Back in early September I bought a new netbook. A samsung NC20. It has 1280x800 video. In the past I've had fun with video doing X so I thought I'd toss a quick install of a Linux on so that I could get some X settings to plug into my config for OpenBSD. After trying seven (yes 7!) Linuices including Ubuntu netbook Remix, I gave up and did a 7 minute install. I even told it to do an X login. Fearing the worst, at the end of the install I entered reboot and crossed everything. And it Just Worked (TM). I put fluxbox on and firefox and compiled the java plug-in so that I could do banking and went to EuroBSD. (I had the ports tree on the netbook, left it overnight) Sweet! No workin' furries as spoonerising Aussies would say. Tell that to whiners about 1280x800 with OpenBSD. Thanks OpenBSD devs. *** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I am subscribed to the list. Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to reply off list. Thankyou. Rod/ --- This life is not the real thing. It is not even in Beta. If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 2009/11/29 Brynet : Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: Actually, I'm used to recommend nvidia cards (desk laptop) for most people because they do support most open source systems (Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris), which is way better than ati at least. ATI(..now AMD) releases full NDA-free documentation on their graphics chipsets, for both 2D and 3D acceleration. http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx#open_gpu http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ They officially supported development of open source drivers, and 2 independent drivers exist including xf86-video-ati(4) and xf86-video-radeonhd(4), both supported under OpenBSD with full hardware graphics acceleration (..DRM/DRI). Yes they actually work here out of the box for me, 2D and 3D... but xv doesn't work for some reason... iEYEAREKAAYFAksfWn4ACgkQCr4UHbMMKguDLwCgxCBX+2GHylBo2clkuT66qqS5 AloAn2oWchCXM9hb3bj0n7VxBGSYHHXO =3LOA -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 07:27:01AM -0500, Brynet wrote:
Hi,
From what I can find, this is a GeForce 7150M / nForce 630M based
chipset.. xf86-video-nv does not have the product ID listed in the
attach structure, this could be due to incompability with the chipset or
maintainer neglegence (..the driver is very rarely updated).
--- xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/10/10 19:17:44
1.9
+++ xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/11/28 12:12:49
@@ -416,6 +416,7 @@
{ 0x10DE042D, Quadro FX 360M },
{ 0x10DE042E, GeForce 9300M G },
{ 0x10DE042F, Quadro NVS 290 },
+ { 0x10DE0531, GeForce 7150M nForce 630M },
{ 0x10DE05E1, GeForce GTX 280 },
{ 0x10DE05E2, GeForce GTX 260 },
{ 0x10DE0600, GeForce 8800 GTS 512 },
This might be enough to get things working, although it could also cause
your system to burst into flames.. making you go emo.
Hopefully xf86-video-nouveau shows up eventually, it matches on all
nVidia devices.. no static product list.
Needs kernel support (nvdrm is probably what we'd call the driver).
I tried to port that june 2008, that almost drove me insane and i've not
looked back at it since. Things may well have improved since then.
as always, I accept diffs. Frankly, i detest nvidia as a company enough
that they're right down at the the absolute bottom of my todo list. And
if the driver doesn't do proper memory management, then they're already
off the list until they do that (I have not checked this, i am grabbing
their kernel tree now to have a quick look).
-0-
--
Nuclear war can ruin your whole compile.
-- Karl Lehenbauer
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
You are a prick.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
2009/12/6 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com: Another sensitive type. Guess there are always a few on every list. Your manner is counter productive, including for yourself. So why do you persist? Unless of course you're more interested in causing mischief than getting anything out of OpenBSD. Please, either adjust your attitude or leave.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 17:08 -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Soner Tari so...@comixwall.org wrote: On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 21:30 +0100, Matthieu Herrb wrote: Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. Sorry Matthieu, but I have to say that this is utter bullshit, and I believe such underestimation is the underlying reason that many software suck. I think the point is the tools to make software are more readily available than the tools to make hardware. Let's say so you want to make a graphics card. Let's also say that you're only interested in playing quake3. What does it take to party like 1999? About 150 MHz on a 180nm process. And what does it cost to fab some 180nm chips? More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. To read his comments with such meaning, I would have to replace the words difficult and skills in his sentences with others. However, assuming that's really the intended meaning, yes you are right, investment to produce hardware or semiconductors is very high (so I cannot do it at home). But that's hardly a concern for venture capitalists or corporations like IBM, Intel, etc., hence hardly a reason for the lack of open hardware. (Unless of course the definition of open here is equated to homemade.) On the other hand, when I look at open source software, things do not seem too bright either (although I can do it at home): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems So, I believe the reasons behind these should be searched somewhere else other than skills or costs. (Looking at other posts in this thread, I regret that I've ever sent my first reply. So, back to silent mode again...)
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:59 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Why did I say that? Let's take a poll on this list of how many people are using one of those cards? Or any list, anywhere. I have not contributed to it in anyway. But why is that relevant? Can you explain? And how did you contribute? Man, you need to learn who are the people you talk to. That is not something we can do for you. Learn to respect people when posting. Ignorance is bliss but in your case, it makes you look fairly bad (notice i didn't use any insult or swearing :) Steph
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 11:11:07AM +0200, Soner Tari wrote: On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 17:08 -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Soner Tari so...@comixwall.org wrote: On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 21:30 +0100, Matthieu Herrb wrote: Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. Sorry Matthieu, but I have to say that this is utter bullshit, and I believe such underestimation is the underlying reason that many software suck. I think the point is the tools to make software are more readily available than the tools to make hardware. Let's say so you want to make a graphics card. Let's also say that you're only interested in playing quake3. What does it take to party like 1999? About 150 MHz on a 180nm process. And what does it cost to fab some 180nm chips? More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. To read his comments with such meaning, I would have to replace the words difficult and skills in his sentences with others. Since your reply implicitly replaced making with designing, that shouldn't prove to much of a stretch.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 10:16 -0500, William Boshuck wrote: Since your reply implicitly replaced making with designing, that shouldn't prove to much of a stretch. My reply explicitly emphasizes the difficulty in designing software, which is part of writing it. Otherwise, I mention I am against comparing making hardware with writing software (i.e. comparing apples with oranges). This is completely OT now anyway.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Matthieu Herrb mhe...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? You mean http://www.opengraphics.org ? What makes you say that? How did *you* contribute? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan? Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. This is probably why there aren't so many of them. A graphics card is about both, and I don't think hardware is that 'hard' (if I can do it it must be easy :-). The real barriers to entry are economic. A mask set for a current generation ASIC (say 45nm) is somewhere upwards of one million US $. (http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=198900081) so unless you have terrific volumes to amortize over, custom chips are pretty much out of play. You could see if you can swing a deal with someone to roll the mask costs into the piece price, but you'll have to convince them that you'll run enough pieces to make it worth their while. In general the specialized design software needed to make a design that will work costs a similar amount (digital and analog simulators, logic synthesis, Design rule checkers, place and route, design for test, etc). That pretty much leaves you in the FPGA world like the opengraphics people are. You can use the FPGA vendor's volumes to get access to leading edge process technology, but are stuck with their architecture. Usually the premium FPGAs start at around $100 ea. and go up into the $1000 range, so you end up looking at the 'value' parts (spartan and cyclone for brand X and brand A) to keep costs down which limits what you can do even more. The one nice thing about FPGA is that the vendors usually make the parts for a long time, so availability and control is good.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
Oh, we have another troll on the lists! Welcome rhubbell! May ignorance be with you and stupidity always guide your emails, amen!
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 06:43:01PM +0200, Soner Tari wrote: On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 10:16 -0500, William Boshuck wrote: Since your reply implicitly replaced making with designing, that shouldn't prove to much of a stretch. My reply explicitly emphasizes the difficulty in designing software, which is part of writing it. Otherwise, I mention I am against comparing making hardware with writing software (i.e. comparing apples with oranges). All kinds of people are against all kinds of valid activities. So what? This is completely OT now anyway. It went off-topic with your first message.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:33:22 -0200 Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 08:20:16AM +, Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Peter Miller feu...@gmail.com wrote: I have 4.6 amd64 installed and can't get X to work at 1280x800. --snip-- Stay away from nVidia graphics cards, especially on laptops if you want to run an open source system on it. -- Matthieu Herrb Can you point some good manufacturers, please? Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan?
Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? You mean http://www.opengraphics.org ? What makes you say that? How did *you* contribute? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan? Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. This is probably why there aren't so many of them. I'd recommend you read the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS -- Matthieu Herrb
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 21:30 +0100, Matthieu Herrb wrote: Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. Sorry Matthieu, but I have to say that this is utter bullshit, and I believe such underestimation is the underlying reason that many software suck. Read this for a summary of cognitive requirements of software design: http://argouml.tigris.org/docs/robbins_dissertation/diss2.html And yes, I did hardware design too. But no, I have no intension to compare hardware and software development like you did. I usually resist replying such threads and keep my silence, but your comment above begged for it.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Soner Tari so...@comixwall.org wrote: On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 21:30 +0100, Matthieu Herrb wrote: Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. Sorry Matthieu, but I have to say that this is utter bullshit, and I believe such underestimation is the underlying reason that many software suck. I think the point is the tools to make software are more readily available than the tools to make hardware. Let's say so you want to make a graphics card. Let's also say that you're only interested in playing quake3. What does it take to party like 1999? About 150 MHz on a 180nm process. And what does it cost to fab some 180nm chips? More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:08:36 -0500 Ted Unangst wrote: More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. How much would that be? Ballpark. Doesn't seem like it would be very much. Seems like you're just hand-waving without real numbers. Wikipedia has a money-raised thermometer on their site from time-to-time and they're raising millions.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 21:30:28 +0100 Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? You mean http://www.opengraphics.org ? What makes you say that? How did *you* contribute? Why did I say that? Let's take a poll on this list of how many people are using one of those cards? Or any list, anywhere. I have not contributed to it in anyway. But why is that relevant? Can you explain? And how did you contribute? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan? Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. This is probably why there aren't so many of them. You're saying the barrier to entry is too high? I'm not expert but I don't believe that is why. There are other barriers. I'd recommend you read the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS I think I may have read that a while ago...I'll look.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. KTHX HAND On 12/5/09, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:08:36 -0500 Ted Unangst wrote: More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. How much would that be? Ballpark. Doesn't seem like it would be very much. Seems like you're just hand-waving without real numbers. Wikipedia has a money-raised thermometer on their site from time-to-time and they're raising millions. -- Sent from my mobile device http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity. -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted. -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30v_g83VHK4
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
blah blah blah go away troll On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 02:59:19PM -0800, rhubbell wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 21:30:28 +0100 Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? You mean http://www.opengraphics.org ? What makes you say that? How did *you* contribute? Why did I say that? Let's take a poll on this list of how many people are using one of those cards? Or any list, anywhere. I have not contributed to it in anyway. But why is that relevant? Can you explain? And how did you contribute? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan? Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. This is probably why there aren't so many of them. You're saying the barrier to entry is too high? I'm not expert but I don't believe that is why. There are other barriers. I'd recommend you read the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS I think I may have read that a while ago...I'll look.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me. You're a moron right? Since when I did I say I contributed to it? You're the one claiming it doesn't cost much. And yet, you didn't contribute. And you want to see it succeed. Seems that you like others to do the hard work, and you can just armchair quarterback right? -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity. -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted. -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30v_g83VHK4
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:10:19 -0500 bofh wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me. You're a moron right? Since when I did I say I contributed to it? You're the one claiming it doesn't cost much. And yet, you didn't contribute. And you want to see it succeed. Seems that you like others to do the hard work, and you can just armchair quarterback right? The sensitive type, eh?
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
Another sensitive type. Guess there are always a few on every list. On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:17:14 -0600 Marco Peereboom wrote: fuck off troll On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 04:26:49PM -0800, rhubbell wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:10:19 -0500 bofh wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me. You're a moron right? Since when I did I say I contributed to it? You're the one claiming it doesn't cost much. And yet, you didn't contribute. And you want to see it succeed. Seems that you like others to do the hard work, and you can just armchair quarterback right? The sensitive type, eh?
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
rhubbell wrote: Another sensitive type. Guess there are always a few on every list. As distinguished from insensitive twerps like yourself.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
rhubbell wrote: Another sensitive type. Guess there are always a few on every list. It has nothing to do with sensitivity, we just have an aversion toward idiots. -Bryan.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
wow now I have point. You are like kid on sand. Look they have thermometer and you haven't :-P :-D You don't have even any respect for long time OpenBSD developers or users which know a LOT more then you. Just because you are unqualified user doesn't mean that you can shout around on everyone. And from your answers in this thread I can see that you haven't even small idea about how expensive is develop of new HW. You are like more and more newbies in Linux community. Give me everything now for free. I don't want to pay anything, you are all idiots without knowledge and if you don't want to give me something for free then I will shout on you a lot. Uh sorry. I know from professionals that I must be nice on people with similar problems because they need doctor. So please take my apology (:-D). On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 12:04 AM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:08:36 -0500 Ted Unangst wrote: More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. How much would that be? Ballpark. Doesn't seem like it would be very much. Seems like you're just hand-waving without real numbers. Wikipedia has a money-raised thermometer on their site from time-to-time and they're raising millions. -- http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Peter Miller feu...@gmail.com wrote: I have 4.6 amd64 installed and can't get X to work at 1280x800. After a default install X won't start and i get an error which i think is caused by nv. I created a xorg.conf file using X -configure and then changed the driver from nv to vesa' and was able to get X running, but only at 800x600 resolution. xrandr showed 800x600 as the max supported resolution. Then I added the following to the Monitor section of xorg.conf and was able to get 1024x768. HorizSync30-120 VertRefresh 50-150 (i have no reason for these numbers.. they just worked) I have tried adding a modeline to solve the problem, but without luck. I'm not quite sure how to get a proper modeline. I used this site to get mine. http://www.arachnoid.com/modelines/ resulting modeline # 1280x800 @ 60.00 Hz (GTF) hsync: 49.68 kHz; pclk: 83.46 MHz Modeline 1280x800_60.00 83.46 1280 1344 1480 1680 800 801 804 828 -HSync +Vsync So here's some output The original Xorg.0.log error after install. Can't get into X. (--) checkDevMem: using aperture driver /dev/xf86 (--) Using wscons driver on /dev/ttyC4 in pcvt compatibility mode (version 3.32) X.Org X Server 1.5.3 Release Date: 5 November 2008 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 Build Operating System: OpenBSD 4.6 amd64 Current Operating System: OpenBSD wobsd.funny.org 4.6 MYKERN.MP#0 amd64 Build Date: 01 July 2009 05:32:34PM Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org to make sure that you have the latest version. Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Fri Nov 27 18:59:14 2009 (EE) Unable to locate/open config file (II) Loader magic: 0x771560 (II) Module ABI versions: X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4 X.Org Video Driver: 4.1 X.Org XInput driver : 2.1 X.Org Server Extension : 1.1 X.Org Font Renderer : 0.6 (II) Loader running on openbsd (--) PCI: (0...@0:1:3) NVIDIA MCP67 Co-processor rev 162, Mem @ 0xfc20/524288 (--) PCI:*(0...@0:18:0) NVIDIA unknown chipset (0x0531) rev 162, Mem @ 0xf400/16777216, 0xd000/268435456, 0xf000/16777216 (==) Matched nv for the autoconfigured driver New driver is nv (==) Using default built-in configuration (30 lines) (==) --- Start of built-in configuration --- Section Device Identifier Builtin Default nv Device 0 Driver nv EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 Driver fbdev EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default vesa Device 0 Driver vesa EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 EndSection Section ServerLayout Identifier Builtin Default Layout Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 EndSection (==) --- End of built-in configuration --- (==) ServerLayout Builtin Default Layout (**) |--Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 (0) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 (1) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 (2) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (==) Not automatically adding devices (==) Not automatically enabling devices (==) No FontPath specified. Using compiled-in default. (==) FontPath set to: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/ (==) ModulePath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/modules (==) |--Input Device default pointer
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
Hi,
From what I can find, this is a GeForce 7150M / nForce 630M based
chipset.. xf86-video-nv does not have the product ID listed in the
attach structure, this could be due to incompability with the chipset or
maintainer neglegence (..the driver is very rarely updated).
--- xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/10/10 19:17:44
1.9
+++ xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/11/28 12:12:49
@@ -416,6 +416,7 @@
{ 0x10DE042D, Quadro FX 360M },
{ 0x10DE042E, GeForce 9300M G },
{ 0x10DE042F, Quadro NVS 290 },
+ { 0x10DE0531, GeForce 7150M nForce 630M },
{ 0x10DE05E1, GeForce GTX 280 },
{ 0x10DE05E2, GeForce GTX 260 },
{ 0x10DE0600, GeForce 8800 GTS 512 },
This might be enough to get things working, although it could also cause
your system to burst into flames.. making you go emo.
Hopefully xf86-video-nouveau shows up eventually, it matches on all
nVidia devices.. no static product list.
-Bryan.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 08:20:16AM +, Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Peter Miller feu...@gmail.com wrote: I have 4.6 amd64 installed and can't get X to work at 1280x800. After a default install X won't start and i get an error which i think is caused by nv. I created a xorg.conf file using X -configure and then changed the driver from nv to vesa' and was able to get X running, but only at 800x600 resolution. xrandr showed 800x600 as the max supported resolution. Then I added the following to the Monitor section of xorg.conf and was able to get 1024x768. HorizSync30-120 VertRefresh 50-150 (i have no reason for these numbers.. they just worked) I have tried adding a modeline to solve the problem, but without luck. I'm not quite sure how to get a proper modeline. I used this site to get mine. http://www.arachnoid.com/modelines/ resulting modeline # 1280x800 @ 60.00 Hz (GTF) hsync: 49.68 kHz; pclk: 83.46 MHz Modeline 1280x800_60.00 83.46 1280 1344 1480 1680 800 801 804 828 -HSync +Vsync So here's some output The original Xorg.0.log error after install. Can't get into X. (--) checkDevMem: using aperture driver /dev/xf86 (--) Using wscons driver on /dev/ttyC4 in pcvt compatibility mode (version 3.32) X.Org X Server 1.5.3 Release Date: 5 November 2008 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 Build Operating System: OpenBSD 4.6 amd64 Current Operating System: OpenBSD wobsd.funny.org 4.6 MYKERN.MP#0 amd64 Build Date: 01 July 2009 05:32:34PM Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org to make sure that you have the latest version. Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Fri Nov 27 18:59:14 2009 (EE) Unable to locate/open config file (II) Loader magic: 0x771560 (II) Module ABI versions: X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4 X.Org Video Driver: 4.1 X.Org XInput driver : 2.1 X.Org Server Extension : 1.1 X.Org Font Renderer : 0.6 (II) Loader running on openbsd (--) PCI: (0...@0:1:3) NVIDIA MCP67 Co-processor rev 162, Mem @ 0xfc20/524288 (--) PCI:*(0...@0:18:0) NVIDIA unknown chipset (0x0531) rev 162, Mem @ 0xf400/16777216, 0xd000/268435456, 0xf000/16777216 (==) Matched nv for the autoconfigured driver New driver is nv (==) Using default built-in configuration (30 lines) (==) --- Start of built-in configuration --- Section Device Identifier Builtin Default nv Device 0 Driver nv EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 Driver fbdev EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default vesa Device 0 Driver vesa EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 EndSection Section ServerLayout Identifier Builtin Default Layout Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 EndSection (==) --- End of built-in configuration --- (==) ServerLayout Builtin Default Layout (**) |--Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 (0) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 (1) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 (2) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (==) Not automatically adding devices (==) Not automatically enabling devices (==) No FontPath specified. Using compiled-in default. (==) FontPath set to: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF,
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 01:33:22PM -0200, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: I'm not a nvidia fanboy, but I've found the need to clarify what nvidia actually does for open source community. You mean, what nvidia does to close parts of unprincipled projects that like to call themselves 'open source'.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 01:33:22PM -0200, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: Actually, I'm used to recommend nvidia cards (desk laptop) for most people because they do support most open source systems (Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris), which is way better than ati at least. I do know that OpenBSD does not allow binary blobs and I agree with that policy, but when you say something like stay away it might seems they give no support at all for open source systems, and thats wrong. Maybe it is not the ideal in case of OpenBSD, but for me, who mostly use Linux for laptop and OpenBSD on servers, nvidia is doing a good, not excelent, job. and that mentality is what is screwing you (and other OpenBSD users) now. thanks Rodrigo! -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: Actually, I'm used to recommend nvidia cards (desk laptop) for most people because they do support most open source systems (Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris), which is way better than ati at least. ATI(..now AMD) releases full NDA-free documentation on their graphics chipsets, for both 2D and 3D acceleration. http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx#open_gpu http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ They officially supported development of open source drivers, and 2 independent drivers exist including xf86-video-ati(4) and xf86-video-radeonhd(4), both supported under OpenBSD with full hardware graphics acceleration (..DRM/DRI). Their binary-blog fglrx driver does not support BSD, this is not a bad thing. nVidia refused to do any of this, concerns of IP theft and such.. funny considering practically all other players in the graphics chipset market have released hardware documentation and/or reference open source code. http://www.intellinuxgraphics.org/ http://linux.via.com.tw/ Matthieu Herrb has no need explaim himself to you, they're are pretty obvious reasons for avoiding them.. he is also on the offical board of directors for the Xorg project. http://wiki.x.org/wiki/BoardOfDirectors Have a nice day. -Bryan.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Brynet bry...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
From what I can find, this is a GeForce 7150M / nForce 630M based
chipset.. xf86-video-nv does not have the product ID listed in the
attach structure, this could be due to incompability with the chipset or
maintainer neglegence (..the driver is very rarely updated).
--- xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/10/10 19:17:44
1.9
+++ xenocara/driver/xf86-video-nv/src/nv_driver.c 2009/11/28 12:12:49
@@ -416,6 +416,7 @@
{ 0x10DE042D, Quadro FX 360M },
{ 0x10DE042E, GeForce 9300M G },
{ 0x10DE042F, Quadro NVS 290 },
+ { 0x10DE0531, GeForce 7150M nForce 630M },
{ 0x10DE05E1, GeForce GTX 280 },
{ 0x10DE05E2, GeForce GTX 260 },
{ 0x10DE0600, GeForce 8800 GTS 512 },
This might be enough to get things working, although it could also cause
your system to burst into flames.. making you go emo.
Hopefully xf86-video-nouveau shows up eventually, it matches on all
nVidia devices.. no static product list.
-Bryan.
Made the changes to nv_driver.c and built xenocara with the following
# cd /usr/xenocara
# rm -rf /usr/xobj/*
# make bootstrap
# make obj
# make build
Upon reboot when i use the nv driver X now recognizes my card, but
it goes to a blank screen (just looks like the terminal) and crashes.
And yes i would love to have a laptop without Nvidia but this is what
my office gave me. I'm just happy they let me run other systems on it.
Or at least try.
Xorg error log
(--) checkDevMem: using aperture driver /dev/xf86
(--) Using wscons driver on /dev/ttyC4 in pcvt compatibility mode (version
3.32)
X.Org X Server 1.5.3
Release Date: 5 November 2008
X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
Build Operating System: OpenBSD 4.6 amd64
Current Operating System: OpenBSD wobsd.funny.org 4.6 MYKERN.MP#0 amd64
Build Date: 28 November 2009 10:18:43AM
Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org
to make sure that you have the latest version.
Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting,
(++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational,
(WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
(==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Sat Nov 28 13:42:51 2009
(==) Using config file: /etc/xorg.conf
(==) ServerLayout X.org Configured
(**) |--Screen Screen0 (0)
(**) | |--Monitor Monitor0
(**) | |--Device Card0
(**) |--Input Device Mouse0
(**) |--Input Device Keyboard0
(==) Not automatically adding devices
(==) Not automatically enabling devices
(==) Including the default font path
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X
11/fonts/OTF,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/
,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/.
(**) FontPath set to:
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/
(**) ModulePath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/modules
(II) Loader magic: 0x771560
(II) Module ABI versions:
X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4
X.Org Video Driver: 4.1
X.Org XInput driver : 2.1
X.Org Server Extension : 1.1
X.Org Font Renderer : 0.6
(II) Loader running on openbsd
(--) PCI: (0...@0:1:3) NVIDIA MCP67 Co-processor rev 162, Mem @
0xfc20/524288
(--) PCI:*(0...@0:18:0) NVIDIA unknown chipset (0x0531) rev 162, Mem @
0xf400/16777216, 0xd000/268435456, 0xf000/16777216
(II) System resource ranges:
[0] -1 0 0x0010 - 0x3fff (0x3ff0) MX[B]E(B)
[1] -1 0 0x000f - 0x000f (0x1) MX[B]
[2] -1 0 0x000c - 0x000e (0x3) MX[B]
[3] -1 0 0x - 0x0009 (0xa) MX[B]
[4] -1 0 0x - 0x (0x1) IX[B]
[5] -1 0 0x - 0x00ff (0x100) IX[B]
(II) extmod will be loaded. This was enabled by default and also
specified in the config file.
(II) dbe will be loaded. This was enabled by default and also
specified in the config file.
(II) glx will be loaded. This was enabled by default and also
specified in the config file.
(II) freetype will be loaded. This was enabled by default and also
specified in the config file.
(II) dri will be loaded. This was enabled by default and also
specified in the config file.
(II) LoadModule: dbe
(II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions//libdbe.so
(II) Module dbe: vendor=X.Org Foundation
compiled for 1.5.3, module version = 1.0.0
Module class: X.Org Server Extension
ABI class: X.Org Server Extension, version 1.1
(II) Loading extension
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
Made the changes to nv_driver.c and built xenocara with the following # cd /usr/xenocara # rm -rf /usr/xobj/* # make bootstrap # make obj # make build Upon reboot when i use the nv driver X now recognizes my card, but it goes to a blank screen (just looks like the terminal) and crashes. And yes i would love to have a laptop without Nvidia but this is what my office gave me. I'm just happy they let me run other systems on it. Or at least try. Yeah, sorry for giving you false hope.. looking further in that file alone shows that the driver checks against the product ID's multiple times. In fact, near the botton where it attempts to assign the NV_ARCH you can see it ends up identifing your card as a NV04 (..ancient), by default. I not going to pretend to understand the driver, but perhaps this is member of the G80 family? find the NVIsG80 function and add 0x0531 to the list of known chipsets. If this fails, I'm sorry.. nVidia really blows chunks eh? -Bryan.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 02:56:05PM -0500, Brynet wrote: Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: Actually, I'm used to recommend nvidia cards (desk laptop) for most people because they do support most open source systems (Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris), which is way better than ati at least. ATI(..now AMD) releases full NDA-free documentation on their graphics chipsets, for both 2D and 3D acceleration. http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx#open_gpu http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ They officially supported development of open source drivers, and 2 independent drivers exist including xf86-video-ati(4) and xf86-video-radeonhd(4), both supported under OpenBSD with full hardware graphics acceleration (..DRM/DRI). Their binary-blog fglrx driver does not support BSD, this is not a bad thing. nVidia refused to do any of this, concerns of IP theft and such.. funny considering practically all other players in the graphics chipset market have released hardware documentation and/or reference open source code. http://www.intellinuxgraphics.org/ http://linux.via.com.tw/ Matthieu Herrb has no need explaim himself to you, they're are pretty obvious reasons for avoiding them.. he is also on the offical board of directors for the Xorg project. http://wiki.x.org/wiki/BoardOfDirectors Have a nice day. -Bryan. Thank you very much for clarifying things back to me, now I understand how equivocated I was and really appreciate the time you spent to reply my message. As said: I'm not a fanboy. I thought nvidia was doing something that was good enough to me, but actually isn't helping the community at all. The part about ati/amd was a bad call, I'm sorry for not knowing how much they are contributing now. I had no idea who Matthieu Herrb was, I just replied with what I know expecting to see what you know, afterall this is a discussion list. I won't apologize for wasting someone elses time, but I also won't be unthankful about it. I should've definitely read more about how things are now before replying, but I had no idea that some people would take it as ofense or bad user mentality. Even if you felt that way somehow, you spent time to gather things up and send back to me. And for that I'm very thankful, as always. --Rodrigo
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 07:21:37PM -0200, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: As said: I'm not a fanboy. I thought nvidia was doing something that was good enough to me, but actually isn't helping the community at all. [...] Yea, `the community'. Who the fuck is that? Nobody managed to explain that to me during the last 20 years. Ciao, Kili, member of the community of Kilis (beware, there are three of us -- me, my brother, and my father)
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Brynet bry...@gmail.com wrote: Made the changes to nv_driver.c and built xenocara with the following # cd /usr/xenocara # rm -rf /usr/xobj/* # make bootstrap # make obj # make build Upon reboot when i use the nv driver X now recognizes my card, but it goes to a blank screen (just looks like the terminal) and crashes. And yes i would love to have a laptop without Nvidia but this is what my office gave me. I'm just happy they let me run other systems on it. Or at least try. Yeah, sorry for giving you false hope.. looking further in that file alone shows that the driver checks against the product ID's multiple times. In fact, near the botton where it attempts to assign the NV_ARCH you can see it ends up identifing your card as a NV04 (..ancient), by default. I not going to pretend to understand the driver, but perhaps this is member of the G80 family? find the NVIsG80 function and add 0x0531 to the list of known chipsets. If this fails, I'm sorry.. nVidia really blows chunks eh? -Bryan. No dice. Thanks for helping though
can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
I have 4.6 amd64 installed and can't get X to work at 1280x800. After a default install X won't start and i get an error which i think is caused by nv. I created a xorg.conf file using X -configure and then changed the driver from nv to vesa' and was able to get X running, but only at 800x600 resolution. xrandr showed 800x600 as the max supported resolution. Then I added the following to the Monitor section of xorg.conf and was able to get 1024x768. HorizSync30-120 VertRefresh 50-150 (i have no reason for these numbers.. they just worked) I have tried adding a modeline to solve the problem, but without luck. I'm not quite sure how to get a proper modeline. I used this site to get mine. http://www.arachnoid.com/modelines/ resulting modeline # 1280x800 @ 60.00 Hz (GTF) hsync: 49.68 kHz; pclk: 83.46 MHz Modeline 1280x800_60.00 83.46 1280 1344 1480 1680 800 801 804 828 -HSync +Vsync So here's some output The original Xorg.0.log error after install. Can't get into X. (--) checkDevMem: using aperture driver /dev/xf86 (--) Using wscons driver on /dev/ttyC4 in pcvt compatibility mode (version 3.32) X.Org X Server 1.5.3 Release Date: 5 November 2008 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 Build Operating System: OpenBSD 4.6 amd64 Current Operating System: OpenBSD wobsd.funny.org 4.6 MYKERN.MP#0 amd64 Build Date: 01 July 2009 05:32:34PM Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org to make sure that you have the latest version. Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Fri Nov 27 18:59:14 2009 (EE) Unable to locate/open config file (II) Loader magic: 0x771560 (II) Module ABI versions: X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4 X.Org Video Driver: 4.1 X.Org XInput driver : 2.1 X.Org Server Extension : 1.1 X.Org Font Renderer : 0.6 (II) Loader running on openbsd (--) PCI: (0...@0:1:3) NVIDIA MCP67 Co-processor rev 162, Mem @ 0xfc20/524288 (--) PCI:*(0...@0:18:0) NVIDIA unknown chipset (0x0531) rev 162, Mem @ 0xf400/16777216, 0xd000/268435456, 0xf000/16777216 (==) Matched nv for the autoconfigured driver New driver is nv (==) Using default built-in configuration (30 lines) (==) --- Start of built-in configuration --- Section Device Identifier Builtin Default nv Device 0 Driver nv EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 Driver fbdev EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 EndSection Section Device Identifier Builtin Default vesa Device 0 Driver vesa EndSection Section Screen Identifier Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 EndSection Section ServerLayout Identifier Builtin Default Layout Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 EndSection (==) --- End of built-in configuration --- (==) ServerLayout Builtin Default Layout (**) |--Screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0 (0) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default nv Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default nv Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0 (1) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default fbdev Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default fbdev Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (**) |--Screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0 (2) (**) | |--Monitor default monitor (**) | |--Device Builtin Default vesa Device 0 (==) No monitor specified for screen Builtin Default vesa Screen 0. Using a default monitor configuration. (==) Not automatically adding devices (==) Not automatically enabling devices (==) No FontPath specified. Using compiled-in default. (==) FontPath set to: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/ (==) ModulePath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/modules (==) |--Input Device default pointer (==) |--Input Device default keyboard (==) The core pointer device wasn't specified explicitly in the layout. Using the
