On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [Please follow-up to debian-x if you want me to see it.]
>
> 4.0.1-10 is in the archive for i386, sparc, and powerpc. John Goerzen is
> building for alpha. Compiles for m68k and arm are still needed.
Is John building them? I thought I was! :-) I
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script
> incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in
> xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The
> patch sho
This is becoming a big time FAQ.
Between 4.0.1-6 and 4.0.1-9 (inclusive), the X server wrapper was broken
such that it would always use a security level of "Console", irrespective
of what was set in /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config.
Also, I think at some point there was debconf confusion that caused
"roo
Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't
> been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM
> so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth.
>
> Can anyone else help him?
>
> - Forwarded message from Dary
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> > Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script
> > incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in
> > xserver-xfree86 are stripped
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote:
>
> I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems
> like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the
> Debian build anyway. Basically, texturing on the G400 DRI driver is
> completely bork
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> wether or not to pass -s to install?
>
> The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the
> symbol & relocation information which is required fo
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 11:12:48AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
>
> > I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> > wether or not to pass -s to install?
> >
> > The modules that get loaded can't get comple
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 09:54:20AM -0600, Thomas E. Vaughan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote:
> >
> > I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems
> > like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the
> > Debian bu
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging.
>
> I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they
> be stripped out when the package is generated.
>
> My completely uneducated guess is that something in
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging.
You're right, I'm not. Always meant to get to that, but still haven't.
> I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they
> be stripped out when the package
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 01:25:40PM -0500, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> Where is dh_strip invoked? I don't see it in the XFree86 config files, so
> I'll assume it is run as part of te packagin process.
Yes. It is run as part of the debian/rules makefile, which wraps the
XFree86 make World and make ins
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> We know how to turn off stripping for Alpha, that's not the problem. The
> problem is why the loader is choking on stripped modules. We don't know.
This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
symbols that are used when l
Good news everybody! I have some debs for m68k. The build failed, but this
time to to a local configuration problem (sbuild timeout, dh_compress took
more than 150 minutes...)
I am trying to get them installed now, so that I can test a little. Will make
them available tomorrow (no changelog, no upl
* Christian T. Steigies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 12:02]:
> I have no PCI bus, I don't see PCI mentioned in the config file, is there a
> way to stop loading that?
Me, I would try moving the module to some other directory, and see what
happens. :)
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutel
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 08:48:48PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> Good news everybody! I have some debs for m68k. The build failed, but this
> time to to a local configuration problem (sbuild timeout, dh_compress took
> more than 150 minutes...)
Glad to hear you've got them, sorry to hear t
"Christian T. Steigies" wrote:
> 'nother problem (after hand fixing the config):
> [...]
> (II) Loader running on linux
> (II) LoadModule: "bitmap"
> (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a
> (II) Module XFree86 Font Renderer: vendor="XFree86 Font Renderer"
> compiled for 4.0
Not NEARLY enough information.
- Forwarded message from Emmanuel Merliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Emmanuel Merliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:25:19 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTE
Emmanuel,
Please do NOT bug Branden with mails about the X packages. Send questions
to the mailing list.
Did you try upgrading with the XFree86 4.0.1 packages from woody? These
will definitely pose problems on a potato system. Try adding the following
lines to your /etc/apt/sources.list and
Sure there is Branden;
Emmanuel, 4.0.1 is *not* for potato. If you want to run 4.0.1 on potato,
please search for Charl P. Botha's packages built for potato. If things
break, recognize that is because 4.0.1 was *never meant* for potato. If
it works, then it is magic. If it breaks, that is to be ex
Michel Dänzer wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know.
I haven't
> been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg
of VRAM
> so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth.
>
> Can anyone else help him?
>
> - Forward
Daryl Moulder wrote:
> > >Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a
> > >1024x768 resolution?
> >
> > Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody
> > :(
> >
> > What depths have you tried? Can you try others?
>
> Yes I have tried 800x60
* Michel D?nzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]:
> > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my
> > default 1024x756 which was the problem.
> Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :)
Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024x
Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the
effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't
sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but
self-documenting config files are nice :).
Thanks :)
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So
Seth Arnold wrote:
* Michel D?nzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]:
> > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it
was only my
> > default 1024x756 which was the problem.
> Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway
:)
Joining the conversation late
Michael Flaig wrote:
> > > > Is there a reason you use the GPM repeater device?
> > >
> > > GPM supports multiple input devices so the trackpad and the usb mouse
> > > works at the same time ...
> >
> > The new input layer does that for you as well in the form of
> > /dev/input/mice .
>
> hey, co
After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
only root is permitted to startx. The second line of
/etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody
but still no change. When I backed out of the update
back to the version
Hello-
Yes, I've the same problem when using startx. Logging in through xdm
works, though.
-Dave Barnett
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Kyle Sallee wrote:
> After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
> a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
> only root is permitted to sta
Hello.
try
dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common
At Thu, 7 Dec 2000 22:26:29 -0500 (EST),
Kyle Sallee wrote:
>
> After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
> a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
> only root is permitted to startx.
:
- Forwarded message from Walter Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Walter Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: none
X-M
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 04:13:04PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
> Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the
> effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't
> sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but
> self-documenting config
[branden, you *need* to change the maintainer address to debian-x --
this is getting nuts. :]
Walter: the /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config file needs to be updated. Change
`root' to read `console' or `everyone' (or `everybody'?).
* Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 20:20]:
> - Forwarded me
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
> symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get
> stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They
> have a .dynsym section
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others.
> Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha & x86 versions of the
> same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences.
While I've got you here, I've
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script
> incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in
> xserver-xfree86 are stripped on Alpha, it renders them unusable. The
> patch sh
This is becoming a big time FAQ.
Between 4.0.1-6 and 4.0.1-9 (inclusive), the X server wrapper was broken
such that it would always use a security level of "Console", irrespective
of what was set in /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config.
Also, I think at some point there was debconf confusion that caused
"ro
Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know. I haven't
> been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg of VRAM
> so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth.
>
> Can anyone else help him?
>
> - Forwarded message from Dar
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:27:22AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> > Oh, while I'm on the subject, I really need that patch to the rules script
> > incorporated for now. For some reason, whenever the modules in
> > xserver-xfree86 are strippe
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote:
>
> I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems
> like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the
> Debian build anyway. Basically, texturing on the G400 DRI driver is
> completely bor
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> wether or not to pass -s to install?
>
> The modules that get loaded can't get completely stripped, or they loose the
> symbol & relocation information which is required f
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 11:12:48AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
>
> > I seemed to miss the patch mentioned, but my guess would be that it involves
> > wether or not to pass -s to install?
> >
> > The modules that get loaded can't get compl
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 09:54:20AM -0600, Thomas E. Vaughan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:21:15PM -0700, Joshua Shagam wrote:
> >
> > I've completely lost track of where DRI bugs should go, but this seems
> > like the kind of thing which might just be due to something bad in the
> > Debian b
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging.
>
> I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they
> be stripped out when the package is generated.
>
> My completely uneducated guess is that something i
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Stuart may not be familiar with the vagaries of Debian packaging.
You're right, I'm not. Always meant to get to that, but still haven't.
> I build with debugging symbols enabled, but Debian Policy insists that they
> be stripped out when the package
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 01:25:40PM -0500, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> Where is dh_strip invoked? I don't see it in the XFree86 config files, so
> I'll assume it is run as part of te packagin process.
Yes. It is run as part of the debian/rules makefile, which wraps the
XFree86 make World and make in
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> We know how to turn off stripping for Alpha, that's not the problem. The
> problem is why the loader is choking on stripped modules. We don't know.
This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
symbols that are used when
Good news everybody! I have some debs for m68k. The build failed, but this
time to to a local configuration problem (sbuild timeout, dh_compress took
more than 150 minutes...)
I am trying to get them installed now, so that I can test a little. Will make
them available tomorrow (no changelog, no up
* Christian T. Steigies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 12:02]:
> I have no PCI bus, I don't see PCI mentioned in the config file, is there a
> way to stop loading that?
Me, I would try moving the module to some other directory, and see what
happens. :)
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolute
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 08:48:48PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> Good news everybody! I have some debs for m68k. The build failed, but this
> time to to a local configuration problem (sbuild timeout, dh_compress took
> more than 150 minutes...)
Glad to hear you've got them, sorry to hear
"Christian T. Steigies" wrote:
> 'nother problem (after hand fixing the config):
> [...]
> (II) Loader running on linux
> (II) LoadModule: "bitmap"
> (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.a
> (II) Module XFree86 Font Renderer: vendor="XFree86 Font Renderer"
> compiled for 4.
Not NEARLY enough information.
- Forwarded message from Emmanuel Merliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Emmanuel Merliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Upgrading to Xfree 4.01
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:25:19 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROT
Emmanuel,
Please do NOT bug Branden with mails about the X packages. Send questions
to the mailing list.
Did you try upgrading with the XFree86 4.0.1 packages from woody? These
will definitely pose problems on a potato system. Try adding the following
lines to your /etc/apt/sources.list and
Sure there is Branden;
Emmanuel, 4.0.1 is *not* for potato. If you want to run 4.0.1 on potato,
please search for Charl P. Botha's packages built for potato. If things
break, recognize that is because 4.0.1 was *never meant* for potato. If
it works, then it is magic. If it breaks, that is to be e
Michel Dänzer wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> I only have a 15" monitor hooked up to my 7200, so I don't know.
I haven't
> been able to get it cranked past 640x480, even though I added a meg
of VRAM
> so I'd be able to do 800x600 at 24-bit depth.
>
> Can anyone else help him?
>
> - Forward
Daryl Moulder wrote:
> > >Did you have a problem with the screen been wrapped around for a
> > >1024x768 resolution?
> >
> > Oh no, looks like the 'fix' for those problems doesn't work for everybody
> > :(
> >
> > What depths have you tried? Can you try others?
>
> Yes I have tried 800x6
* Michel D?nzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]:
> > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it was only my
> > default 1024x756 which was the problem.
> Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway :)
Joining the conversation late ... err .. is 1024
Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the
effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't
sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but
self-documenting config files are nice :).
Thanks :)
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So
Seth Arnold wrote:
* Michel D?nzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 15:55]:
> > Yes I have tried 800x600 and 640x480 and those modes were ok it
was only my
> > default 1024x756 which was the problem.
> Ahem, I was asking about other _depths_ actually, but thanks anyway
:)
Joining the conversation late
Michael Flaig wrote:
> > > > Is there a reason you use the GPM repeater device?
> > >
> > > GPM supports multiple input devices so the trackpad and the usb mouse
> > > works at the same time ...
> >
> > The new input layer does that for you as well in the form of
> > /dev/input/mice .
>
> hey, c
After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
only root is permitted to startx. The second line of
/etc/Xserver is Console and I have even tried Anybody
but still no change. When I backed out of the update
back to the version
Hello-
Yes, I've the same problem when using startx. Logging in through xdm
works, though.
-Dave Barnett
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Kyle Sallee wrote:
> After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
> a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
> only root is permitted to st
Hello.
try
dpkg-reconfigure xserver-common
At Thu, 7 Dec 2000 22:26:29 -0500 (EST),
Kyle Sallee wrote:
>
> After updating XFree86 in woody from 4.0.1-9 to a 4.0.10
> a previously perfectly running XFree86 decides that now
> only root is permitted to startx.
:
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E
- Forwarded message from Walter Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Walter Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: /usr/X11R6/bin/X (xserver-common).
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:09:53 -0800
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: none
X-
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 04:13:04PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
> Branden, could you add a comment line to the Xwrapper.config file to the
> effect of, ``Valid values are: root, console, everybody'' -- I wasn't
> sure when this one hit me, so I guessed (and got it right, but
> self-documenting config
[branden, you *need* to change the maintainer address to debian-x --
this is getting nuts. :]
Walter: the /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config file needs to be updated. Change
`root' to read `console' or `everyone' (or `everybody'?).
* Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 20:20]:
> - Forwarded m
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> This loader is different from the libc loader in that it operates on the
> symbols that are used when linking an object (and are the ones that get
> stripped). This differ from the .so libraries that the libc loader uses. They
> have a .dynsym section
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> It is still puzzleing why it does something different on Alpha vs others.
> Maybe someone could run objdump --headers on Alpha & x86 versions of the
> same modules so we can see if there are any interesting differences.
While I've got you here, I've
Hi,
Is 24+8 bit color depth overlay supported for ATI 3D RagePro by XF 4.0.1?
Thank you.
Louis
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I'm trying to run X from an init script during boot up like this:
#!/bin/bash
while true; do
su - kiosk -c /usr/X11R6/bin/startx
done
Starting this manually as root works as expected. While booting I get:
X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting.
var: allowed_users, value
69 matches
Mail list logo
