Torsten Giebl wrote:
Hello !
Some more info. Upon startup (windowed) I get this message in the
console : “libGL warning: 3D driver claims to not support visual 0x5b”.
This doesn’t cause any problem AFAIK, everything works fine windowed.
Another interesting fact is that something in this machine doesn’t
support 1280x800x24 so to get that mode working I have to use an utility
called 915resolution to patch some in-memory table and add support for
that mode so X can use it. I use mode 0x38 though, not 0x5b.
About bad drivers, was it not Intel that
released the sources for their drivers to the
Open Source Community ? ( Or was this just an idea
from them ? )
CU
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
The drivers are open source:
http://xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/driver/xf86-video-intel-2.0.0.tar.bz2
which fixes the video bios hack 915resolution. You just have to install
it and change “i810” in xorg to “intel” and 915resolution is no longer
necessary.
Huh, that’s good to know. Thanks!
–ryan.
Looks like you are using the modesetting branch of the intel drivers.
This is VERY new and currently under heavy development. Yes, you don’t
need to poke the video BIOS with i915resolution any more but in adding
that all that xrandr and hotpluggy sweetness
(http://keithp.com/blog.html ) things are going to be broken. It is
probably helpful to file the bug in http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ so that
the developers can see it and get round to fixing it. Please also check
out the Intel Linux graphics drivers site:
http://www.intellinuxgraphics.org/index.html .On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 20:41 -0500, Chris Pemberton wrote:
The latest intel driver:
xf86-video-intel-2.0.0.tar.bz2
fixes the 1280x800 issue. I no longer need 915resolution. I just have
to use “intel” instead of “i810” in the xorg file to get it working.
–
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 20:41 -0500, Chris Pemberton wrote:
The latest intel driver:
xf86-video-intel-2.0.0.tar.bz2
fixes the 1280x800 issue. I no longer need 915resolution. I just have
to use “intel” instead of “i810” in the xorg file to get it working.
Looks like you are using the modesetting branch of the intel drivers.
This is VERY new and currently under heavy development. Yes, you don’t
need to poke the video BIOS with i915resolution any more but in adding
that all that xrandr and hotpluggy sweetness
(http://keithp.com/blog.html ) things are going to be broken. It is
probably helpful to file the bug in http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ so that
the developers can see it and get round to fixing it. Please also check
out the Intel Linux graphics drivers site:
http://www.intellinuxgraphics.org/index.html .
I suppose I could revert back to the older i810 driver and see if any
problems go away.
Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
The latest intel driver:
xf86-video-intel-2.0.0.tar.bz2
fixes the 1280x800 issue. I no longer need 915resolution. I just have
to use “intel” instead of “i810” in the xorg file to get it working.
Looks like you are using the modesetting branch of the intel drivers.
This is VERY new and currently under heavy development. Yes, you don’t
need to poke the video BIOS with i915resolution any more but in adding
that all that xrandr and hotpluggy sweetness
(http://keithp.com/blog.html ) things are going to be broken. It is
probably helpful to file the bug in http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ so that
the developers can see it and get round to fixing it. Please also check
out the Intel Linux graphics drivers site:
http://www.intellinuxgraphics.org/index.html .
I suppose I could revert back to the older i810 driver and see if any
problems go away.
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
I reverted back to an old i810 driver and all my problems vanished.
In case anyone cares, the 2.0.0 version of the Intel drivers pulls a
fast one: the i810 and intel driver are the exact same driver, so you
have to use a pre-2.0.0 i810 if you want something that works.
Thanks
ChrisOn 6/1/07, Chris Pemberton <@Chris_Pemberton> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 20:41 -0500, Chris Pemberton wrote: