On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:17:43AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 10:22, Fred Clift wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
As for non-i386 -Server:
I have an almost finished set of diffs for ia64 to build and
See the alpha list for patches I
I found when reading the /var/log/XFree86.0.log
(WW) RADEON(0): [dri] Some DRI features disabled because of version mismatch.
[dri] radeon.o kernel module version is 1.1.1 but 1.3.1 or later is preferred.
--
Gunnar Flygt, SR
___
I just want to report one more good thing. I recompiled mozilla
from scratch right out of the ports directory, and it runs fine now
with Xft support and all.
--
Gunnar Flygt, SR
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
I find it working very fine on my troublesome 5.0-CURRENT
box. I've had big problems for some weeks getting 4.2
to work. I gave up the other day, but 4.3.0 worked
straight out of the box, if you can say so after a
portupgrade XFree86
What didn't work was the installation of XFree86-FontServer
the prompt back again. No mozilla started. I'm trying a recompile
of Xft using `portupgrade -r -f Xft` to see if this makes any
difference.
But at least XFree86 4.3.0 runs fine.
--
Gunnar Flygt, SR
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:10:57AM +0100, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 12:52:38AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:36, Wes Peters wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2003 08:57, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 07:19, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I find it
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 12:52:38AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:36, Wes Peters wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2003 08:57, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 07:19, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I find it working very fine on my troublesome 5.0-CURRENT
box. I've had
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 12:52:38AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:36, Wes Peters wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2003 08:57, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 07:19, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I find it working very fine on my troublesome 5.0-CURRENT
box. I've had
cvsuped a few minutes ago the ports tree. In all of the directories
connected to XFree86-4 4.3.0 the pkg-comment is missing. Therefore
patches don't apply clean.
Used the ver -11 of the pacthes leading to 4.3.0
--
Gunnar Flygt, SR
___
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 03:55:53PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 01:52, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
cvsuped a few minutes ago the ports tree. In all of the directories
connected to XFree86-4 4.3.0 the pkg-comment is missing. Therefore
patches don't apply clean.
Used the ver
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:16:28PM -0500, Mezz bsdforums.org wrote:
Nice, thanks for the works! Do anyone know how it goes with the Nvidia
driver?
Yes works on my regular desktop at work. Running 4.7-STABLE with
nvidia in it.
Cheers,
Mezz
I've committed the update of XFree86 to 4.3.0 to
as earlier
described. The info No Windows found is shown and then I get
the prompt back again. No mozilla started. I'm trying a recompile
of Xft using `portupgrade -r -f Xft` to see if this makes any
difference.
But at least XFree86 4.3.0 runs fine.
Something from the past?
Serg N. Voronkov
Message -
From: Vladislav V. Zhuk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Eric Anholt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: Problex with Matrox G450 and XFree86 4.3.0 on 4.8-STABLE
On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 12:27:48AM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 11:05, Barry Irwin wrote:
Just to confirm that I now have the Matrox G450 Dual head up and running,
just with no DRI on the second head, no real loss. As was pointed out part
of the problem was some sillyness on my part, loading the agp.ko module, and
having it compiled
with Matrox G450 and XFree86 4.3.0 on 4.8-STABLE
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 11:05, Barry Irwin wrote:
Just to confirm that I now have the Matrox G450 Dual head up and
running,
just with no DRI on the second head, no real loss. As was pointed out
part
of the problem was some sillyness on my part
with the .xsession-errors thing happens,
but if I open a
failsafe xterm, it lets me in under root privileges.
Like the original person who reported this, I also
cvsup stable
and have 4.8 rc. This also only started happening
after upgrading to
XFree86 4.3.0
Eric Anholt wrote:
Again, as I said in the message that began this thread, it is not going
to be updated. Follow the instructions at my DRI site to get the MFC of
the DRM (which supports that card) to -stable.
Okay, well, I did this. And. After a couple of false starts, I got the
proper
On Sun, 16 Mar 2003, Doug Barton wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, Alban Hertroys wrote:
One thing that doesn't seem to work is installing the XFree-4 metaport
of 4.3.0 over the old XFree 4.2.1 installation. The metaport succesfully
finds all it's dependencies, and just registers - without
.
Its really annoying the hell out of me. You can get so used to a nice dual head
machine :)
Does anyone have a working dual head machine with Xfree86 4.3.0 and 1 or more
Matrox cards?
Looking at the Xfree86 log file, the last line i see is also:
--
(II) Truncating PCI BIOS Length to 32768
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 02:48:26AM -0500, Andrew J Caines wrote:
Starting the server as normal with xinit gives normal startup messages, then fails
with a signal 11:
I have this problem, too. Same nv server. I'm happy to provide
details. One that might help is that this is an Athelon XP
Patch works great on a March 14th 11:30am CST cvsup running on a AMD Duron
with a ATI Radeon 8500LE 128MB with XFree 4.3.0. glxinfo reports direct
rendering: YES, and my dmesg shows the card being initialized. Best of all,
games are starting up now. Note, I recompiled the kernel as well as
I have built all my ports from scratch and almost everything
works okay.
The only problems I've had is with xclock and mozilla:
# xclock -d
Warning: Cannot convert string to type XftFont
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
If run without -d, xclock doesn't segfault but still complains.
# mozilla
Option XkbRules xfree86
Option XkbModel pc102
Option XkbLayout de
Option XkbVariant nodeadkeys
works (I had pc104 without the nodeadkeys thingy). Even that shiny EUR sign
Had you tried pc105 without nodeadkeys?
Work like a charm :-) Thanks.
[ other information on
Eines schoenen Tages schrieb Richard Nyberg:
The only problems I've had is with xclock and mozilla:
# xclock -d
Warning: Cannot convert string to type XftFont
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
If run without -d, xclock doesn't segfault but still complains.
# mozilla
No running window
Eric Anholt wrote:
I've committed the update of XFree86 to 4.3.0 to ports. I think I've
cleaned up after my mess at this point, but there may still be issues.
Please report to me if you have any problems with the new ports or any
issues with XFree86 that you didn't have in 4.2.0.
System:
Igor Pokrovsky wrote:
Eric Anholt wrote:
I've committed the update of XFree86 to 4.3.0 to ports. I think I've
cleaned up after my mess at this point, but there may still be issues.
Please report to me if you have any problems with the new ports or any
issues with XFree86 that you
On Wednesday 12 March 2003 23:45, Igor Pokrovsky wrote:
3. Latest opera-6.12.20030305(freebsd) is falling with core on exit.
Any ideas are appreciated.
I will provide any required information on request.
I have FreeBSD 4.7 release and a somewhat mixed version of XFree
4.1/4.2, in use with
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. DRI is not available, Mesa is falling back to indirect rendering.
(I have Radeon M7, kernel module is loaded, it was working with 4.2.0)
I have the same problem, i got the exact error:
$ glxinfo
libGL error: InitDriver
Malcolm Kay wrote:
On Wednesday 12 March 2003 23:45, Igor Pokrovsky wrote:
3. Latest opera-6.12.20030305(freebsd) is falling with core on exit.
Any ideas are appreciated.
I will provide any required information on request.
I have FreeBSD 4.7 release and a somewhat mixed version of
a small problem preventing me from upgrading quite a few of the
XFree86 4.3.0 related ports:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/usr/ports: portupgrade XFree86-libraries
--- Upgrading 'XFree86-libraries-4.2.1_7' to 'XFree86-libraries-4.3.0'
(x11/XFree86-4-libraries)
--- Building '/usr/ports/x11/XFree86-4
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:15:06 +0100, Igor Pokrovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Eric Anholt wrote:
I've committed the update of XFree86 to 4.3.0 to ports. I think I've
cleaned up after my mess at this point, but there may still be issues.
Please report to me if you have any problems
Stijn Hoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is with PERL_VERSION=5.8.0 in /etc/make.conf, and no /usr/bin/perl
(since this is -CURRENT), which is why mkhtmlindex barfs.
use.perl port
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 11:48:38AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Stijn Hoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is with PERL_VERSION=5.8.0 in /etc/make.conf, and no /usr/bin/perl
(since this is -CURRENT), which is why mkhtmlindex barfs.
use.perl port
Noted, thanks. I thought this was only
Stijn Hoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 11:48:38AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
use.perl port
Noted, thanks. I thought this was only needed for -STABLE, but apparently I
was wrong. After manually installing a symlink the port installed fine of
course, but I gather
** Reply to message from Eric Anholt [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 07 Mar 2003 08:57:25
-0800
Is it necessary to deinstall XFree86 4.2 before installing the 4.3 patches?
It should work just fine, as long as you have both of the patches.
I ended up having to run pkg_delete on all of the 4.2 XFree-86
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 15:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would the build and installation have worked properly if I had simply run 'make
install' instead of 'make' in step 4?
It would have made sure that the component parts were installed. The
ports system can't ensure things are updated, though,
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 01:52, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
cvsuped a few minutes ago the ports tree. In all of the directories
connected to XFree86-4 4.3.0 the pkg-comment is missing. Therefore
patches don't apply clean.
Used the ver -11 of the pacthes leading to 4.3.0
The -12 patches at the site
to make sure no old issues still exist!
~Ken
- Original Message -
From: Gunnar Flygt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FreeBSD Stable [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: XFree86 4.3.0
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:32:12AM +0100, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I just want to report
On Thursday 06 March 2003 00:52, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 23:36, Wes Peters wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2003 08:57, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 07:19, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I find it working very fine on my troublesome 5.0-CURRENT
box. I've had big
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 05:31, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
On 06 Mar 2003 00:52:38 -0800
Eric Anholt wrote:
The -9 diff is up (http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/X/files.html) and I
haven't had any reports of problems with it so far. If you get X 4.3.0
working with it in the
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 01:38, Gunnar Flygt wrote:
I found when reading the /var/log/XFree86.0.log
(WW) RADEON(0): [dri] Some DRI features disabled because of version mismatch.
[dri] radeon.o kernel module version is 1.1.1 but 1.3.1 or later is preferred.
The DRI should still work fine, you
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 10:22, Fred Clift wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
As for non-i386 -Server:
I have an almost finished set of diffs for ia64 to build and
See the alpha list for patches I posted today to make -Server build for
alpha - these are not 'ports
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 05:25, Ken Mays wrote:
Would the FreeBSD team consider the benefits of integrating Xfree86 v4.3.x
for v4.8?!? The upgrade that was done on the video drivers alone was worth
it for me.
The release engineers have been considering allowing XFree86 4.3 in
4.8-RELEASE, but it
I'd like to cast a vote for waiting on our 4.8 release until there is a
solid 4.3.[01] release of X, as long as the delay is say, weeks, rather
than months. I've had to patch the X ports by hand with stuff from the X
cvs tree in order to get it to recognize my new video card, and there are
a lot
Pokrovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Jose M. Alcaide
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 3:17 AM
Subject: Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt-
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 05:25, Ken Mays wrote:
Would the FreeBSD team consider the benefits
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:17:43AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 10:22, Fred Clift wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
As for non-i386 -Server:
I have an almost finished set of diffs for ia64 to build and
See the alpha list for patches I
At this point, I'd guess probably not, given that there was (is?) some
amount of work for the MAINTAINER to do to get it to build correctly,
and there's not much chance for testing before the release, which is
only two weeks away.
That's just my guess, though, not a policy statement. :-)
Bruce.
47 matches
Mail list logo
