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

Re: X breaks in CD-based installer environment



On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 06:09:50PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> The part that is frustrating is this:
> 
> (**) R128(0): Using framebuffer device
> (II) Loading sub module "fbdevhw"
> (II) LoadModule: "fbdevhw"
> (II) Loading /live/lib/modules/linux/libfbdevhw.a
> (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="The XFree86 Project"
>         compiled for 4.1.0.1, module version = 0.0.2
>         ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.4
> (II) UnloadModule: "ati"
> (II) UnloadModule: "fbdevhw"
> (II) Unloading /live/lib/modules/linux/libfbdevhw.a
> (II) UnloadModule: "vgahw"
> (II) Unloading /live/lib/modules/libvgahw.a
> (II) UnloadModule: "r128"
> (II) Unloading /live/lib/modules/drivers/r128_drv.o
> (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration.
> 
> All of a sudden, *something* is deciding it's time to bail out.  It looks like
> the fbdevhw module.  But no level of verbosity is explaining.  On a normal
> startup, right after the fbdevhw module talks about itself, R128(0) speaks up
> and claims the ATI Rage 128 LF device.
> 
> I don't understand the internals of
> xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/fbdevhw/fbdevhw.c to speculate on what's
> going on.  Is there a place where some xf86DrvMsg()s could be added to
> help diagnose this apparent decision by the module to bail out??

Problem solved.  It was caused by a missing /dev/fb0 file.  This, of
course, exists in a normal installation but was missing from the
instalelr environment.

Maybe something (fbdevhw.c or r128_driver.c, I'm not sure which) should
complain if /dev/fb0 cannot be opened?

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |    If a man ate a pound of pasta and a
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    pound of antipasto, would they
branden@debian.org                 |    cancel out, leaving him still
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    hungry?              -- Scott Adams

Attachment: pgp7F2iop37qS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: