Matt Price wrote:
gaah. I think the new code is justSomehow not ocmpatible with my
video hardware! Or do y'all sti3ll haves ome suggestions up your
sleeve?
I think there's a bug in 2.6 somewhere...
I used vga=0x31a (VESA mode 0x11a: 1280x1024x16, 160x64) under 2.4 and
it worked perfectly. D
Matt Price wrote:
gaah. I think the new code is justSomehow not ocmpatible with my
video hardware! Or do y'all sti3ll haves ome suggestions up your
sleeve?
I think there's a bug in 2.6 somewhere...
I used vga=0x31a (VESA mode 0x11a: 1280x1024x16, 160x64) under 2.4 and
it worked perfectly. Doesn
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 12:39:16AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:13, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
> > >
> > > This is documented in linux/Documentation/fb/vesafb.txt
> >
> > Yes yes, I know this. I
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 12:39:16AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:13, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
> > >
> > > This is documented in linux/Documentation/fb/vesafb.txt
> >
> > Yes yes, I know this. I
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:13, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
> >
> > This is documented in linux/Documentation/fb/vesafb.txt
>
> Yes yes, I know this. I get an error on boot -- "invalid mode" -- and
> am aked to choose from 8 o
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:07:55PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:12, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > just to report in: this offers no improvement. To be honest I'm kind of
> > surprised... Anyway, with vesafb compiled into my kernel, and other
> > framebuffer mod
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:13, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
> >
> > This is documented in linux/Documentation/fb/vesafb.txt
>
> Yes yes, I know this. I get an error on boot -- "invalid mode" -- and
> am aked to choose from 8 o
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:07:55PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:12, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > just to report in: this offers no improvement. To be honest I'm kind of
> > surprised... Anyway, with vesafb compiled into my kernel, and other
> > framebuffer mod
> To enable VESAFB on boot you have to put vga=X in your lilo.conf.
>
> EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
I'm using "vga=792", I think it's [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/Kasper
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [E
> To enable VESAFB on boot you have to put vga=X in your lilo.conf.
>
> EG "vga=791" for 1024x768x16bpp or "vga=788" for 800x600x16bpp.
I'm using "vga=792", I think it's [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/Kasper
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:12, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> just to report in: this offers no improvement. To be honest I'm kind of
> surprised... Anyway, with vesafb compiled into my kernel, and other
> framebuffer modules left out, I get an error "/dev/fb: no such
> device". Is vesafb s
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 01:50:25PM -0500, Matt Price wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:46:29PM +0200, Kasper Rönning wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I got bad results using radeonfb (had it compiled in the kernel), with
> > only a few white dots in the uppermost lin
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:12, Matt Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> just to report in: this offers no improvement. To be honest I'm kind of
> surprised... Anyway, with vesafb compiled into my kernel, and other
> framebuffer modules left out, I get an error "/dev/fb: no such
> device". Is vesafb s
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 01:50:25PM -0500, Matt Price wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:46:29PM +0200, Kasper Rönning wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I got bad results using radeonfb (had it compiled in the kernel), with
> > only a few white dots in the uppermost lin
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:46:29PM +0200, Kasper Rönning wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In the old days (under kernel 2.4.x) I had
> > framebuffer enabled, and a "vga=" line in my lilo.conf. I can no
> > longer use this boot option, as my console is rendered useless if I
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:46:29PM +0200, Kasper Rönning wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In the old days (under kernel 2.4.x) I had
> > framebuffer enabled, and a "vga=" line in my lilo.conf. I can no
> > longer use this boot option, as my console is rendered useless if I
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> > > past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> > > so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> > > anyone got the framebuf
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> > > past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> > > so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> > > anyone got the framebuf
> > My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> > past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> > so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> > anyone got the framebuffer thingy working in kernel 2.6? Can you give
> >
> > My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> > past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> > so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> > anyone got the framebuffer thingy working in kernel 2.6? Can you give
> >
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Matt Price wrote:
> My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> anyone got the framebuffer thingy working in
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Matt Price wrote:
> My main gripe is that whatever complex thing I had worked out in the
> past to get a full-screen display on my console is no longer working,
> so Im back to a tiny little squarei nthe middle of the screen. Has
> anyone got the framebuffer thingy working in
22 matches
Mail list logo
