From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 16 09:37:44 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: x11@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C093106566B; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:37:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gizmo.2hip.net (gizmo.2hip.net [64.74.207.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623B38FC14; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (adsl-154-185-142.bna.bellsouth.net [68.154.185.142]) (authenticated bits=0) by gizmo.2hip.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2G9bddx089530 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:37:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) From: Robert Noland To: Peter Jeremy In-Reply-To: <20100316011406.GA63420@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <20100311134413.GH19740@bsdcrew.de> <20100316011406.GA63420@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 04:37:34 -0500 Message-Id: <1268732254.2608.1306.camel@balrog.2hip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, RCVD_IN_PBL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RDNS_DYNAMIC,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on gizmo.2hip.net Cc: x11@FreeBSD.org, Martin Wilke Subject: Re: [Call for Testing] X.org 7.5 for FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:37:44 -0000 On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 12:14 +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2010-Mar-11 14:44:14 +0100, Martin Wilke wrote: > >Please report any problems and issus to x11 (at) FreeBSD.org. > > The upgraded Xorg fails to work for my $work desktop (dual monitors on > an ATI RV380 / Radeon X600) using the radeon driver. (The radeonhd > driver does not support the GPU). x600 is an r300 based chip, so not radeonhd... I also don't recommend using the radeonhd driver unless you have specific need for a feature which only exists in radeonhd. AFAIK, the only thing is HDMI Audio support. radeonhd is maintained separately and not by AMD directly. Some time ago, it did have better support for the new chips, but that time has long passed and the radeon driver will run all chips. > Without any xorg.conf: > - it reports it is unable to load module "fbdev". xorg-server-1.7.5,1 > installs lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfbdevhw.{la,so} but this is never > accessed. > - Both screens come up in 1024x768 mirror mode (though the native > resolution reported by the monitors is 1280x1024). It isn't possible > to switch to dual screen mode using xrandr. I generally don't recommend running without a config. If it works for you, great, but if you don't have a config, it tries to load every module to see what works. This means that it is critical that all of your modules are up to date and don't conflict in any way... I suggest running at least a minimal Xorg.conf. Generally, that which is generated from X -configure is fine. > Using my previous xorg.conf (which works with Xorg 7.4), both screens > start correctly (with all the windows in the LH screen) but as soon as > I move a window into the RH screen, both screens get corrupted and it > looks like that window area is mirrored across both screens with about > 1/3 screen horizontal offset. Moving another window on the LH screen > and then moving focus to a window in the RH screen it to update to match > its ghost on the LH screen. (I have a poor-quality picture of the > resultant mess but it won't go through the mailing list). > > Photo, xorg.conf and Xorg.log files available on request. I don't have enough displays or room for displays these days, so I normally run single headed. Keep in mind that I have 5 dev machines surrounding me right now, so display availability is at a premium. I'll plug in an x600 this weekend and give it a go multi-head. For the most part, single vs multi head should not matter. The xrandr system does interact per-head, but (at least without TTM) you still have a single frame buffer that covers both displays. robert. > Any suggestions? > > On the positive side, X does start and stop cleanly (without destroying > the console). -- Robert Noland FreeBSD