Screen resolution on FreeBSD 7.0

2008-04-09 Thread Nishita Desai
From: Nishita Desai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 10:26 PM Subject: Screen resolution on FreeBSD 7.0 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, I just installed FreeBSD 7.0 on a Dell Inspirion 640m notebook and am trying to get the screen resolution right. I need a 1280x800 wide-

Re: Screen resolution on FreeBSD 7.0

2008-04-16 Thread Nishita Desai
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Predrag Punosevac wrote: > You are missing line DefaultDepth 24. Remove i810 and install Intel driver > from ports instead. Adjust xorg.conf > accordingly. You my want to use xrandr to experiment with different modes > dynamically. Thanks for your reply. Adding

Re: Screen resolution on FreeBSD 7.0

2008-04-21 Thread Nishita Desai
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:59 AM, " शंतनु महाजन (Shantanoo Mahajan) " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://dhoomketu.net.in/node/6 Thank you all for helping. Right now, I have the resolution fixed with 915resolution (http://www.geocities.com/stomljen/) I will consider installing the Intel d

Xfce with graphical login

2008-05-11 Thread Nishita Desai
Hello, I just installed Xfce4.4 on FreeBSD 7.0. I have been trying to get it to directly give me a graphical login. The Xfce manual says this can be done using gdm. According to it, I need to copy the example file "xfce44.desktop" into /usr/X11R6/share/xsessions. The example file is supposed to be

Re: Xfce with graphical login

2008-05-11 Thread Nishita Desai
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Fraser Tweedale wrote: > As an Xfce user, I've always found gdm to be more trouble than > it's worth. Have you had a look at /usr/ports/x11/slim - it's > a nice, lightweight graphical login manager. On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Manolis Kiagias wrote: > This i

X on Intel GM965 chipset

2008-05-16 Thread Nishita Desai
Hello, I just installed FreeBSD 7.0 on a Dell Vostro 1200. It has Intel's GM965 chipset and I cannot get X to work at the right resolution of 1280x800. I updated and reinstalled the x11-drivers/x11-video-i810 and x11-drivers/x11-intel ports. But X still dies whenever I tell it to use "i810" drive

Re: X on Intel GM965 chipset

2008-05-16 Thread Nishita Desai
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Nishita Desai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I updated and reinstalled the x11-drivers/x11-video-i810 and > x11-drivers/x11-intel ports. Sorry, that should be xf86-video-i810 and xf86-video-intel. Rega

Re: X on Intel GM965 chipset

2008-05-16 Thread Nishita Desai
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Dominic Fandrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You only need xf86-video-intel and enter "intel" as the Driver in your > xorg.conf. I'm running a GM965 at 1440x900 this way. > > I even think that x11-video-i810 and xf86-video-intel conflict. So best > deinstall both

Re: X on Intel GM965 chipset

2008-05-16 Thread Nishita Desai
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > deinstall > > xorg > xorg-drivers (both are meta-packages) > > cd /usr/ports/x11-drivers/xorg-drivers > make config > > select drivers you need > > then make install clean Thank you all. That seems to have done it. re

Very slow xfce

2008-05-17 Thread Nishita Desai
Hello, I am having a very strange problem. I just finished installing Xfce-4.4 and got it to work with XDM. But all xfce native applications are behaving very strangely: 1. The terminal doesn't echo back my characters till I've typed the next character. This is applicable to backspace key and pas

Re: Very slow xfce

2008-05-17 Thread Nishita Desai
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Glyn Millington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is Xfce just too much for the system? It ran nicely here a while back on > a 900mhz machine - but was noticeably slower than fvwm, so I ditched it > :-) It's a brand-new laptop, so I don't think it's got to do with memo

Re: Very slow xfce

2008-05-17 Thread Nishita Desai
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Glyn Millington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Have a look at /var/log/Xorg.0.log - any interesting error messages? > "Nishita Desai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Nothing I can spot. Okay, I didn't see this earli