-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:21:07 -0800, "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please DON'T top post to any FreeBSD list!
Who was top-posting? I certainly wasn't! I hate that moronic practice with
a vengeance.
Only mildly less annoying is people w
<-Original Message->
From: Kevin Oberman
Sent: 3/2/2005 10:45:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Xorg 6.8.1 and SCHED_ULE vs. SCHED_4BSD
> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:36:11 +0100
> From: Godwin Stewart
> Sender: [
> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:36:11 +0100
> From: Godwin Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 02:32:02 -0500 (EST), Jeff Roberson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is the process that does the FFT in kern
> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:24:58 +0100
> From: Godwin Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:21:39 -0800, "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd say something is very wrong on your systems and I'd ALMOST bet it's
> > ata related. Maybe ATA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 02:32:02 -0500 (EST), Jeff Roberson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is the process that does the FFT in kernel, niced, or rtprio'd?
last pid: 93131; load averages: 0.96, 0.49, 0.24 up 0+05:18:20 15:29:47
48 processes: 2 running,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:21:39 -0800, "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd say something is very wrong on your systems and I'd ALMOST bet it's
> ata related. Maybe ATA-MkIII would help things out.
Possibly, altho' I doubt it given that the
Hi,
i have relatively early updated my XFree to Xorg. In Version 6.7.x
it has an problematic driver for Intel's Ich2 I815 Graphik-Card.
The Developers say's this should be fixed in 6.8.1, may i have seen that
it's not really. The failures are a little bit less then fromer with
6.7.x but it's
the
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:36:23 +0100
> > From: Godwin Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:49:00 +0100, Michael Nottebrock
> > <[EMAIL PROTEC
> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:36:23 +0100
> From: Godwin Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:49:00 +0100, Michael Nottebrock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've been using that for a long time no
On Monday, 28. February 2005 03:25, Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 11:36:43AM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:12, Gary Kline wrote:
> > > > How about adjusting the configuration then?
> > >
> > > There is utterly no xorg.conf file; the xorg probes
> > > set
Godwin Stewart napisaÅ(a):
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:49:00 +0100, Michael Nottebrock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been using that for a long time now, since Xorg 6.8.1 breaks vt-
switching for me.
One of the things I've been doing is to record some of my old cassettes
(you know, those old plastic
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:55, Gary Kline wrote:
> > FYI X.Org should have just used your XF86-4 config file by default.
>
> XF86Config bombed instantly, even with startx.
> This afternoon after hours of testing one-change-at-a-time
> I found that the DefaultDepth of 8 is at least one
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 11:36:43AM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:12, Gary Kline wrote:
> > > How about adjusting the configuration then?
> >
> > There is utterly no xorg.conf file; the xorg probes
> > set the resolution to the max (1600x1200), and the
> > displa
> No, the problem's the other way round. Every time I want to
> portupgrade something else, portupgrade also wants to upgrade Xorg. I
> don't want the latest Xorg after the horror stories I heard.
> That's why I'm building firefox-1.0.1 independently of the ports
> system, so that I don't have to
On Sunday, 27. February 2005 02:06, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:12, Gary Kline wrote:
> > > How about adjusting the configuration then?
> >
> > There is utterly no xorg.conf file; the xorg probes
> > set the resolution to the max (1600x1200), and the
> > display `qui
Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 10:41:33PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>> On Saturday, 26. February 2005 22:19, Gary Kline wrote:
>> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:00PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>> > > On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
>> > > > On
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:12, Gary Kline wrote:
> > How about adjusting the configuration then?
>
> There is utterly no xorg.conf file; the xorg probes
> set the resolution to the max (1600x1200), and the
> display `quivers' --for lack of a better word. So far
> my attemps wit
On Saturday 26 February 2005 02:49 pm, you wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 01:38:22PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> > Try setting in /etc/make.conf
> >
> > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xfree86-4
> >
> > There is an entry in /usr/ports/UPDATING about it.
> >
> > Upgrading with sysutils/portmanager should be
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 01:38:22PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
>
> Try setting in /etc/make.conf
>
> X_WINDOW_SYSTEM=xfree86-4
>
> There is an entry in /usr/ports/UPDATING about it.
>
> Upgrading with sysutils/portmanager should be able to reset all of your
> dependencies after that.
>
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 10:41:33PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> On Saturday, 26. February 2005 22:19, Gary Kline wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:00PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > > On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:49:00 +0100, Michael Nottebrock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> edit /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf, find the HOLD_PKGS = [ line and change
> it to
>
> HOLD_PKGS = [
> 'bsdpan-*',
> 'xorg-*',
> 'imake-*',
> ]
That's
On Saturday 26 February 2005 01:19 pm, Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:00PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> > > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor"
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Y
On Saturday, 26. February 2005 22:19, Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:00PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> > > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor"
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Yo
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:00PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor"
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > You don't need to update a port just because it depends on Xorg. The X
On Saturday, 26. February 2005 13:05, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You don't need to update a port just because it depends on Xorg. The X
> > API is quite stable so you can update just Xorg without expecting any
> >
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:35, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> No, the problem's the other way round. Every time I want to portupgrade
> something else, portupgrade also wants to upgrade Xorg. I don't want the
> latest Xorg after the horror stories I heard.
>
> That's why I'm building firefox-1.0.1 independent
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 10:25:24PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:36, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> > ISTR not that long ago - when ports were updated from 6.7.0 - people were
> > reporting random freezes and crashes with the new vers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You don't need to update a port just because it depends on Xorg. The X
> API is quite stable so you can update just Xorg without expecting any
> problems. (I did XFree8
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:36, Godwin Stewart wrote:
> ISTR not that long ago - when ports were updated from 6.7.0 - people were
> reporting random freezes and crashes with the new version of Xorg. This
> seems to have died down now so I might consider the update, which might not
> be a bad idea given
29 matches
Mail list logo
