Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 19:37:19 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: doug@safeport.com Cc: "lokadamus@gmx.de" <lokadamus@gmx.de>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: generating xorg.conf does not work Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1508311927470.81774@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1508311807570.72286@bucksport.safeport.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1508280029090.72286@bucksport.safeport.com> <55E0A5E5.1040803@gmx.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1508281432180.72286@bucksport.safeport.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1508281631580.74312@wonkity.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1508311807570.72286@bucksport.safeport.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, doug@safeport.com wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Warren Block wrote: > >> On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, doug@safeport.com wrote: >>> >>> Maybe I should have taken the questions one at a time. My highest priority >>> question is that the handbook is in error on how to generate xorg.conf. >>> startx is just not correct. >> >> I don't understand what you are saying there. > > This part got cut from my first post. The handbook says: > > To generate the configuration file and start the X system, issue > this command: > > % startx > > This is clearly wrong. 5.4 also says autoconfiguration is the preferred > method. I found a post to forums.freebsd.org on 8/4/15 from wblock@ saying: > "Auto-generating xorg.conf is not recommended any more." It's not, at least not on the forums. The X11 section of the Handbook needs a complete rewrite. > Hence my confusion. The next part I understand and will try. But it seems to > me that Xorg -configure, if it is there, should work. I was asking should > this be reported as a bug (I could find nothing) or is there another way just > not documented yet? Last I knew, --configure caused a core dump. I don't know why, but it's just another reason to avoid it. >>> The next issue (Xorg -confgure), I only noted in passing. My question here >>> is this a FreeBSD issue or should it be PR'd to Xorg. For starters 'Xorg >>> -configure' selected the vesa driver, autoconfiguration picked the ATI >>> Radeon driver. The vesa driver could not negociate a setting. Note even if >>> it did the screen resolution would be 1026x760 or whatever the current >>> one-size fits all resolution is. This is clearly an error in the Xorg >>> command. There may have been other errors in the generated xorg.conf file, >>> but the first one was the vesa driver could not get something out of the >>> BIOS it liked. Earlier versions of Xorg this all worked albeit with the >>> vesa driver. >> >> Back up for a second. Exactly what video hardware do you have? If you >> have onboard Intel video along with an add-on Radeon card, it would >> probably be best to disable the Intel video in the BIOS. > > If this not a depreciated method, I can report it and/or provide all the > data. That was not really my question as clearly the radeon driver works. > Again I was going for, "is this just a documentation error"? We could be dealing with multiple problems. It's hard to tell. The reason for asking about the exact hardware was to see if either or both of the Intel and Radeon hardware was too new to be supported, because then the vesa driver would be involved. >> Otherwise, try this for xorg.conf. Do not add this to an existing file, >> this is the *entire* file: >> >> Section "Device" >> Identifier "Card0" >> Driver "radeon" >> EndSection > > I assume I can then also add the font commands as needed. I'm not sure even those are needed. > I could find no documentation in the FreeBSD wiki or on Xorg that > indicated X would just piece all this together. As above, the X11 chapter needs a rewrite. > I assume this would now go in /usr/local/etc/X11. Yes. Some people still use /etc/X11, but that breaks the separation of ports and base.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1508311927470.81774>