I have installed the minimal set of packages with RedHat 9.0 and have installed
XFree86 xfs later using rpm.
XFS is not running after reboot while it is in init.d and rc.d[12345].
Anyone know what causes this behaviour.
Regards,
Marcel Stegehuis
___
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've been trying to find specs for implementing hardware RENDER
support for my graphics card. I have the specs for the card. The
problem is that nobody seems to know what the various RENDER functions
in a driver are supposed to do, or what the structs
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Alexander Shopov wrote:
Quite frankly... random uninformed people making claims that X
is slow, without any shred of a clue or properly deduced
scientifically measured and reproduceable instrumented data, will
always be out there. We can't stop people from spreading
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:10:01 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: xfs install on RedHat machine
I have installed the minimal set of packages with
The _only_ answer that matters is the
technical/scientific one. End users opinions about how things
Technically and scientifically you are right and I agree with you, but
not everyone has the patience for the scientific side. I as sorry as you
are about this thing, but some magic some times
On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 10:33, Dimitris S. Economou wrote:
Hi all,
I have recently bought a Compaq evo N610C laptop and I'm encountering a problem with
the graphics card adapter.
The display is flickering producing a distortion in the displayed image. While the
display is in this destorted
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have installed the minimal set of packages with RedHat 9.0 and have installed
XFree86 xfs later using rpm.
XFS is not running after reboot while it is in init.d and rc.d[12345].
Anyone know what causes this behaviour.
Regards,
Marcel Stegehuis
I saw a similar problem
--- Kieran O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Why would you want more than one pointer? and more
importantly how would
it be used? I wonder if you are not making life
more difficult than it
needs to be. Actually the more I think about the
more I really want to
know the answer to thoes
On Thursday 09 October 2003 08:03, Kieran O'Sullivan wrote:
Why would you want more than one pointer? and more importantly how would
it be used?
1. It's quite conciveable that two cursors could be used to perform two
actions at the same time, I mean most of us use multitasking OS'es so the
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Chris Burghart wrote:
I saw a similar problem recently; essentially, the init.d/xfs
script was being run, but no xfs got started and there was no clue
in the logs about what was failing. Then I realized that my root
filesystem was full. After I cleaned up some space and
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, david mattatall wrote:
Why would you want more than one pointer? and more importantly how would
it be used?
1. It's quite conciveable that two cursors could be used to perform two
actions at the same time, I mean most of us use multitasking OS'es so the
cursors should
What is funny however, is that any alternative to X, is more or
less functionally useless until someone writes an X server for
it for most general purpose computing.
Well, it would really only /require/ an xlib-compatable interface, but
everybody seems to port XFree86 to run as a client to
Some months ago, VIA released an XFree86 Savage driver in source form that
included, among other things, a DRI driver and XvMC support.
Has that code been integrated into the XFree86 source tree? Will it make
XFree86 4.4? Or is it still waiting in limbo for someone to do the
integration?
--
-
CR Benchmarking is a bit like academic tests. It proves that you're good
CR at the benchmark, not at the task.
You can't cheat at a benchmark.
(To be a little bit less cryptical: benchmarks are all we've got to
make sure we're making sense in our design and implementation. In the
right hands,
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 09:50:07PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I'd say it would be better to reuse *-def.cpp files (didn't know something
like that existed).
I've preprocessed all *-def.cpp files included in XFree86/xc/lib, gathered
all symbols currently exported from XFree86 shared libraries,
Oh my!
Judging from the large number of *flames* I got for suggesting it, I guess a
kernel module for X is not such a good idea after all.
Oh well, I hope it was at least worth brainstorming.
XFree86 *might* wish to consider a modulette to cover things that userland
CAN'T do, like AGP, DMA,
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:38:44 +, Raymond Jennings wrote:
Oh well, I hope it was at least worth brainstorming.
Brainstorming is (almost) never a bad idea.
XFree86 *might* wish to consider a modulette to cover things that userland
CAN'T do, like AGP, DMA, IRQ, and so on.
AGP stuff can be
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 09:50:40AM -0700, Tim Roberts wrote:
Some months ago, VIA released an XFree86 Savage driver in source form that
included, among other things, a DRI driver and XvMC support.
Has that code been integrated into the XFree86 source tree? Will it make
XFree86 4.4? Or is
Does the notion of a kernel module have ANY merit at all? Or was the
idea
complete garbage?
Obviously your idea isn't complete rubbish, but you are preaching to a
very particular crowd, so you need to make sure you're ideas aren't
contrary to their personal biases, sad isn't it?
Ok, now that
Hmm...
An IOCTL shouldn't have any more overhead than reading or writing to a
file...
I'd think that the kernel is lightning fast at *dispatching* the IOCTL.
Handling it is something else entirely and depends on how long the device
driver decides to take. It's device specific.
I don't
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Raymond Jennings wrote:
Oh great XFree86 spirits! Please forgive my transgressions! I have sinned
in ignorance! I repent! (:D)
It was I who suggested the kernel module. It has since been considered
heresy. My apologies.
There's nothing wrong with kernel modules,
On the scale of the speed of graphics operations, IOCTLs are very
expensive. Compare how many IOCTLs a second you can do compared to
things like triangle rates of modern graphics hardware (which are
over a 100 Million a second).
Mark.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Raymond
On Mer, 2003-10-15 at 21:07, Alex Deucher wrote:
the 3D drvier needs to be updated to mesa 5.x. Not much work has been
done on it and I think there are some issues with the 2D driver.
There's no way it will make it into 4.4.0. the current code is on a
branch in DRI cvs. If you are
Alan, that's the CLE266/via driver, right? the savage driver is still
barely touched as far as I know. there was some talk of shelving the
old savage_1-0-0 branch and starting a new one on savage_1-0-1 since
the old one needed so many changes to get synced up to the trunk.
Alex
--- Alan Cox
24 matches
Mail list logo
