[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Xfree86 problems, sarge/woody



On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 07:56:27AM -0800, Arlie Stephens wrote:
> Hi All,

HI

[...]
> 
> X was running after that first stage of the upgrade (to latest woody)
> but would not restart once I rebooted the system. I went ahead and
> upgraded to sarge anyway, figuring I might get lucky, and could just
> as easily debug it on sarge as on woody. 
> 
> The complaint is that it fails to find a framebuffer, regardless of
> which answer I give to the question of whether or not to use the
> kernel's framebuffer. I (stupidly) failed to save the XF86Config file
> before starting, but the current one is identical to an older one that
> was lying around in /etc/X11. What I don't know is whether that's one
> from before I got X working on this system the last time, or one that
> actually worked. 

you have specified "UseFBDev" "true"

> Section "Device"
> 	Identifier	"RIVA TNT2"
> 	Driver		"nv"
> 	Option		"UseFBDev"		"true"
> EndSection
                        ^^^^^^^^^

maybe try turning that off in the config file directly. Also, if that
dosn't work, try the vesa driver so that maybe you get a working X and
can sor thte nv driver later.

> 
> I'm attaching copies of /var/log/XFree96.0.log and and /etc/X11/XF86Config-4
> in the hopes that someone recognizes these symptoms.  Hopefully this
> list will accept attachments - I haven't tried that before. 
> 
> p.s. I am very much looking forward to etch - its version of X seems
> much better at figuring out how to install itself correctly. But I'd
> prefer to get this system working reliably on sarge, rather moving to
> etch immediately, if I can figure out how to do this. 

you know, the transition from xfree86 to xorg is a big one. I wouldn't
waste time trying to fix up a package that is going to be replaced by
the migration to etch. in fact, if you can do it, I'd just uninstall
X, dist-upgrade to etch and then reinstall X.

.02

A

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: