Re: MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2001-01-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: "UP systems"? I can't make that one out. UniProcessor DRI + G400 works for me on an Athlon system (Irongate north bridge). I do have multiple contexts at the same time and I have never had any lock up that seems directly related to that (and I do hammer the

Re: MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2001-01-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > "UP systems"? I can't make that one out. UniProcessor > DRI + G400 works for me on an Athlon system (Irongate north bridge). I > do have multiple contexts at the same time and I have never had any > lock up that seems directly related to that (and I do hamme

Re: MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2001-01-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Juergen Kreileder wrote: However I still get random hangs with Q3A and deterministic hangs with any windowed GL application when the window gets un- and then remapped (e.g. when iconifying/deiconifying windows, or when switching between workspaces). I don't consider that working. I write wind

Re: MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2001-01-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > However I still get random hangs with Q3A and deterministic hangs > with any windowed GL application when the window gets un- and then > remapped (e.g. when iconifying/deiconifying windows, or when switching > between workspaces). I don't consider that working. I wri

MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2000-12-24 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Anyone get MGA ( G400 ) DRI working on an SMP box? Everytime I tried it it locks the machine. - Btw I'm using 3.3.6 and utah agian - but left debian 4.0.2 incase I want to lock up my box one day I guess. =) cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgg

MGA ( G400 ) DRI on an SMP box

2000-12-24 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Anyone get MGA ( G400 ) DRI working on an SMP box? Everytime I tried it it locks the machine. - Btw I'm using 3.3.6 and utah agian - but left debian 4.0.2 incase I want to lock up my box one day I guess. =) cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgg

X 4.0.2 - 3.3.6

2000-12-14 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Is anyone working on 3.3.6 in woody? cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgghttp://gooseegg.sourceforge.net | | QuakeForge http://www.quakeforge.net | | Personalhttp://www.westga.edu/~stu7440| |

X 4.0.2 - 3.3.6

2000-12-14 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Is anyone working on 3.3.6 in woody? cheers, Terry -- --- | GooseEgghttp://gooseegg.sourceforge.net | | QuakeForge http://www.quakeforge.net | | Personalhttp://www.westga.edu/~stu7440| |

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Seth Arnold wrote: Compared against Utah, at least the last time I looked at it, this is really pretty quick and easy. Whether or not the features supported by Utah are imporant enough to justify the work involved with getting it to go is entirely dependent upon the applications one needs to ru

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: As the gtkglarea maintainer (and since you hinted it's the OpenGL subsystem what broke) I feel this is somehow my fault... could you please elaborate on this? It seems to be that gtk depends on X 4.0.1+, and that caused my working xserver to be purged and repla

Re: Utah GLX

2000-12-13 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Seth Arnold wrote: Perhaps it is cutting out users who join the project with woody's original release. You don't fall into this category. You *can* install 3.3.6-11potato18 though, which is probably pretty damn close to the 3.3.6-18 you miss so much. I feel like after giving a 'head's up' on

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Seth Arnold wrote: > Compared against Utah, at least the last time I looked at it, this is > really pretty quick and easy. Whether or not the features supported by > Utah are imporant enough to justify the work involved with getting it to > go is entirely dependent upon the applications one need

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > As the gtkglarea maintainer (and since you hinted it's the OpenGL > subsystem what broke) I feel this is somehow my fault... could you > please elaborate on this? It seems to be that gtk depends on X 4.0.1+, and that caused my working xserver to be purged and r

Re: Utah GLX

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Seth Arnold wrote: > Perhaps it is cutting out users who join the project with woody's > original release. You don't fall into this category. You *can* install > 3.3.6-11potato18 though, which is probably pretty damn close to the > 3.3.6-18 you miss so much. I feel like after giving a 'head's u

Utah GLX

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Some of you may have seen my forwarded email earlier today. In that mail I complained about having my X install replaced with a non functional half install onf X 4.0.1 and 3.3.6-18. I use utah to play games, do modeling, and develop GL applications. I am outraged that after expressing concer

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Joshua Shagam wrote: >Well, it was also a poor forethought for you to not issue a package hold on >the XFree packages. It's easy enough to use dselect to request that a >package not be upgraded... (hint: = key) Who uses dselect anymore? This is about a package maintianers

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Seth Arnold wrote: >Terry, a few quick comments -- first, Utah-glx is in the past. While >their work may have been nifty at one point, and for people running >3.3.x perhaps necessary, XF 4.0.1 has a *much* easier GL system. This is about poor forethought. I complained months

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Joshua Shagam wrote: >It would be nice if the XFree 4 packages had a 'Conflicts: utah-glx' in it, >but as has been said already, you ARE running Debian *usntable*, and you >reap what you sow in that regard... don't take it out on Branden, please. I told the X people months ag

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Joshua Shagam wrote: >Well, it was also a poor forethought for you to not issue a package hold on >the XFree packages. It's easy enough to use dselect to request that a >package not be upgraded... (hint: = key) Who uses dselect anymore? This is about a package maintianers

Utah GLX

2000-12-12 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
Some of you may have seen my forwarded email earlier today. In that mail I complained about having my X install replaced with a non functional half install onf X 4.0.1 and 3.3.6-18. I use utah to play games, do modeling, and develop GL applications. I am outraged that after expressing concer

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-11 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Seth Arnold wrote: >Terry, a few quick comments -- first, Utah-glx is in the past. While >their work may have been nifty at one point, and for people running >3.3.x perhaps necessary, XF 4.0.1 has a *much* easier GL system. This is about poor forethought. I complained month

Re: [mongoose@users.sourceforge.net: X upgrade policy]

2000-12-11 Thread Terry 'Mongoose7; Hendrix II
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Joshua Shagam wrote: >It would be nice if the XFree 4 packages had a 'Conflicts: utah-glx' in it, >but as has been said already, you ARE running Debian *usntable*, and you >reap what you sow in that regard... don't take it out on Branden, please. I told the X people months a