Re: Can I hide the cursor?
on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:14:07AM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote: This has been discussed and answered many times. The answer is no. 1) X always must always have a cursor. 2) The cursor's appearence depends on the window it is over. You can change the root window cursor with xsetroot, and if another window doesn't specify a cursor, it inherits the cursor from it's parent. If no parent all the way down to the root window has specified a cursor then that window gets the root window cursor. But if windows have specified cursors explicitly, there's nothing you can do about that. *but* if you use a libXcursor theme with every cursor icon fully transparent you can *really* get rid of the cursor, an app changing the cursors appearance just changes it to another 'invisible' cursor. I've not seen this 'technique' discussed before. -- Matthew ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Can I hide the cursor?
If you use XFree 4.3 with libxcursor, you can create a completely transparent cursor theme. -- Matthew on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:21:35PM +0800, tom wrote: I want to hide the cursor when I using touchscreen in XFree86 4.20,I found that this quesstion have been discussed three times,but no answer.Then,does this means I can't hide the cursor at all?Can xsetroot resolve this problem?I tried but faild.I just can't change the cursor with it. Any idea? Thank you. Roy - Do You Yahoo!? ?? ??+??? ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: ATI Imageon 100
Hi; on Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 11:04:35AM -0700, Tim Roberts wrote: The IMAGEON 100 will never be a stellar performer. It was designed for low cost and low power, not high performance. It does have a simple blitter, and it has a reasonable YUV overlay, but the motion compensation acceleration is only slightly better than straight software. I dont think were expecting 'stellar' performance here, just reasonable will do - the current situation is ~700 k/sec bandwidth in certain xrandr orientations. There is an O/S-independent (theoretically) acceleration layer for the IMAGEONs, but it is ATI-proprietary, and to my knowledge is only released to their partners. I think parts of this are exposed in the w100 framebuffer driver ( in the sharp kernels source ), though its pretty much undocumented and I dont really wanna risk boiling a 400$ lcd poking it. So please if anyone from ATI is listening, please consider to support an XFree86 driver development! Didn't we just see this movie? What's their incentive to do so? The people who are selling IMAGEON-based devices want Windows CE, and ATI is happy to help those people with CE drivers. ATI do mention on there Imageon page they support 'Linux mobile'. Just wondering where/what that is Also, I think this is a different movie. The embbeded market is different to the desktop one. Many thanks; -- Matthew Allum ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [XFree86] Compiling Kdrive / TinyX
on Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 12:44:07PM +0100, J?rn Willh?ft wrote: Hi list, I already posted my problems last Friday, but it seems as if no one was able to help. :( Did ever anyone did succeed in compiling TinyX? If yes, with which exact configuration? Yes, lots of times. Here a very simeple host.def I use; #define BuildServersOnly YES #define KDriveXServer YES #undef BuildRandR #define BuildRandR YES #define BuildXInputLib YES #define ProjectRoot/usr/X11R6 #define Freetype2Dir $(TOP)/extras/freetype2 #define Freetype2LibDir$(TOP)/exports/lib #define BuildXTrueType YES #define TinyXServerYES #define XfbdevServer YES By now I tried on SuSE Linux with gcc 2.95 and gcc 3.2 and recently on Slackware 8.1 and gcc 2.95. I attached the original posting with the detailed difficulties. Im pretty sure debian has a tinyX package in unstable. -- Matthew ___ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
[Xpert]Fbdev Server, Matrox card and ARM CATS board problems.
Hi; I have a framebuffer running fine on top of an old Matrox PCI card ( mellenium? ) on an ARM based machine with a Linux 2.4.18 kernel and Debian unstable. Unfortunately when I run either X4.2 with the fbdev driver or a TinyX ( kdrive ) server, The X Server comes up but the screen fills with garbage. Id sort of assumed that X running on top of the framebuffer should just 'work'. Am I missing something ? I have used fbset in the console to switch between various modes and all seems fine there. Any help greatly appreciated. -- Matthew Allum ___ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
