On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 01:02, Faheem Mitha wrote: > Dear People, > > I am currently tracking sarge. My video card is the Matrox Millenium > G450. Recently, X 4.2 arrived in sarge. As it turns out, it broke my > working XF86Config-4 file for 4.1, though I didn't realise it right > away, since I keep the X server up and running for long periods. > > I sent in a bug (169055) to xserver-xfree86, (though this might not be > the right place). It can be viewed at > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=no&bug=169055 > > I haven't received any reply about it yet, but then Branden Robinson > is presumably swamped with these things. > > I won't try to reproduce the entire bug report here, but in a > nutshell, with my original working config file for 4.1, which > corresponds to a resolution of 1280x1024, the server tries to come up, > but then hangs with a blank screen. The X logs complain about "out of > range errors", and my monitor also puts up a little box saying "Out of > Range" which I have never seen before. I can get a working X server > for 4.2, but only with the lower resolution of 1024x768. Note that the > config file in the bug report is the original config file referred to > at the beginning of this paragraph. Out of range errors - particularly when the monitor is reporting them too, have to do with monitor scanline settings that the monitor can't support - being too wide or too tall or too fast for a resolution. The graphics card might handle it fine, but the monitor can't process the signal. "Out of range" is the new way a monitor reports this problem - the old way was distorted images and sometimes smoke pouring out of the back, all too often with a voided warranty on the monitor. It sounds like a monitor scanline setting that had pushed tolerances but worked in previous editions of X11 is now over what your monitor can support. Try switching your default resolution down to something more reliable, and using xvidtune to bring the 1280x1024 settings into range for your preferences and monitor. It *might* be considered an X11 bug in that there wasn't a warning that improved performance by X11 4.2 might make some *pushed to the limit* mode scanline settings go over the limit, but that isn't necessarily the primary fear when rolling out something like a new edition of X11 - major structural breakage of software and hardware more likely is. > > I have seen other similar reports on the net, which leads me to > believe it might be a bug, but if so it should be much more visible, > because Matrox cards are pretty common. So, can anyone offer me any > enlightenment on this? > > I have downgraded to 4.1 and my original XF86Config-4 file still works > with 4.1 (otherwise I would fear for my sanity), and I've pinned all > the X packages (all 27 of them) so apt is kept happy. But clearly I > can't stay with 4.1 forever. > > Faheem. > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org > > -- Mark L. Kahnt, FLMI/M, ALHC, HIA, AIAA, ACS, MHP ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935 Email: kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part