I have a Voodoo3 graphics card and was trying out direct rendering, which
worked with the 4.0.1 that I compiled myself. I installed the experimental
4.0.1 packages (phase1v6), and after figuring out the error with the X
wrapper (the XF86_NONE problem), I got the server working. However, I
stumbled
I have a Voodoo3 graphics card and was trying out direct rendering, which
worked with the 4.0.1 that I compiled myself. I installed the experimental
4.0.1 packages (phase1v6), and after figuring out the error with the X
wrapper (the XF86_NONE problem), I got the server working. However, I
stumbled
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:20:08AM -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > I tried to get Xt to look in both directories, but several different
> > attempts failed.
>
> It shouldn't be that hard to open one pathname and if you get ENOENT,
> to try opening the other insteadthat might be a useful
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:20:08AM -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > I tried to get Xt to look in both directories, but several different
> > attempts failed.
>
> It shouldn't be that hard to open one pathname and if you get ENOENT,
> to try opening the other insteadthat might be a usefu
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Whether app-defaults files can be regarded as configuration files or not is
> an arbitrary decision. By moving them to /etc/X11 in the default
> configuration, XFree86 has indicated their opinion. I see no reason to
> differ with them.
In my soon-t
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 11:19:17PM +0200, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> 1. It is my understanding that app-defaults files are not configuration
>files, they are just default settings stored outside the binary.
>Therefore, a sysadmin can be expected not to modify them.
On the contrary, they can.
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:12:27AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Why don't you just tell that XF4 will recognize
> etc/X11/XF86Config-4 before etc/X11/XF86Config ? it would have informed me of
> my error in far less words.
But it would not have reinforced the desirable behavior of Reading The
F'ing
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Whether app-defaults files can be regarded as configuration files or not is
> an arbitrary decision. By moving them to /etc/X11 in the default
> configuration, XFree86 has indicated their opinion. I see no reason to
> differ with them.
In my soon-
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 11:19:17PM +0200, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> 1. It is my understanding that app-defaults files are not configuration
>files, they are just default settings stored outside the binary.
>Therefore, a sysadmin can be expected not to modify them.
On the contrary, they can
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:12:27AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Why don't you just tell that XF4 will recognize
> etc/X11/XF86Config-4 before etc/X11/XF86Config ? it would have informed me of
> my error in far less words.
But it would not have reinforced the desirable behavior of Reading The
F'ing
10 matches
Mail list logo
