On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 12:09:43PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:51:46AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 10:35:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 01:08:49AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > Package: linux-2.6 > > > > Version: 2.6.14-7 > > > > Severity: important > > > > Sigh, can't get a break with alpha kernel support around here. After > > > > upgrading to 2.6.14 (from 2.4.27), the Matrox framebuffer no longer works > > > > correctly on my alpha with a Matrox Millenium II. The matroxfb_base module > > > > loads without error, but gives me corrupt video output only. > > > Try turning off acceleration. > > Doesn't make a difference. > > What did make a difference was, after googling, loading fbcon manually > > before loading matroxfb_base. Given that I'm loading matroxfb_base by hand > > (/etc/modules), it's not getting loaded via udev or anything like that, it > > seems to me that it's my responsibility to load fbcon by hand as well, but > Indeed, if you load it by hand, you need to load fbcon also. Maybe there > should be a dependency between matroxfb and fbcon, which modprobe would then > take care of, but i guess it also makes sense to use matroxfb without fbcon, > or something. Well, depmod dependencies are based on who uses symbols from what -- obviously matroxfb doesn't *need* fbcon in order to load and be used. And one may have their console on a different video card with no framebuffer involved. If any change is to be made here to enforce auto-loading of fbcon, it seems to me that it makes more sense to just build fbcon into the kernel instead of doing dances with the initramfs managers. > > it's still something of an unexpected change from 2.4. It might be nice to > > have these modules all autoloaded by something, but it's not strictly > > necessary, and some users may not want the framebuffer activated > > automatically? > I think that if you configure yaird to load in matroxfb, it should then also > load fbcon. Well, first of all, I'm not using yaird... > > The other issue (and the first thing I was trying to get work, which led me > > to believe the fb was completely broken) is that, even though console works > > on the framebuffer now, X does not. This breakage corresponds to the kernel > > upgrade, not to any changes in X, so still looks like a kernel bug to me. > What X version are you using ? 6.8.2.dfsg.1-1; I've just upgraded to 6.9.0.dfsg.1-2, but haven't restarted anything yet. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature