[gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Dan Johansson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2275 bytes --]

Today I did the "mistake" of re-emerging 
(emerge --update --deep --verbose --newuse world --pretend
) x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8 as a result of a changed USE-flag 
(GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE). Now when I try to do a new 
emerge --update --deep --verbose --newuse world --pretend
 I am getting a lot of blocked packages and emerge also wants to pull in a lot 
of new packages. Here is a part of the output of the emerge....:

[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-proto/kbproto-1.0.3)
[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-misc/util-macros-1.1.0)
[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-libs/libX11-1.0.3)
[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-proto/xextproto-7.0.2)
[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-proto/xf86bigfontproto-1.1.2)
<...SNIP...>
[blocks B     ] x11-libs/libxkbui (is blocking
x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8)
[blocks B     ] x11-libs/libXp (is blocking x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8)
[blocks B     ] x11-misc/xorg-cf-files (is blocking
x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8)
[blocks B     ] x11-misc/imake (is blocking x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8)
[blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
x11-libs/libXxf86dga-1.0.1)
[ebuild  N    ] x11-misc/util-macros-1.1.0  USE="-debug" 42 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-proto/kbproto-1.0.3  USE="-debug" 56 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-proto/xextproto-7.0.2  USE="-debug" 66 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-proto/xf86bigfontproto-1.1.2  USE="-debug" 36 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-proto/inputproto-1.3.2  USE="-debug" 45 kB
<...SNIP...>
[ebuild  N    ] x11-misc/xorg-cf-files-1.0.2  USE="-debug" 258 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-misc/imake-1.0.2  USE="-debug" 110 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-libs/libXScrnSaver-1.1.0  USE="-debug" 221 kB
[ebuild  N    ] app-text/rman-3.2  77 kB
[ebuild  N    ] x11-libs/libXxf86dga-1.0.1  USE="-debug" 226 kB

I have ">x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8" in /etc/portage/package.mask
as I could not make my Laptop, with an ATI-videocard, work with the new 
modular X.

Any suggestions on how to solve this?
-- 
Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu>
***************************************************
This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons!
***************************************************

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1107 bytes --]

On Thursday 14 September 2006 18:46, Dan Johansson wrote:
> Today I did the "mistake" of re-emerging
> (emerge --update --deep --verbose --newuse world --pretend
> ) x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8 as a result of a changed USE-flag
> (GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE). Now when I try to do a new
> emerge --update --deep --verbose --newuse world --pretend
>  I am getting a lot of blocked packages and emerge also wants to pull in a
> lot of new packages. Here is a part of the output of the emerge....:
>
> [blocks B     ] <=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.9 (is blocking
> x11-proto/kbproto-1.0.3)
[SNIP]
> I have ">x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r8" in /etc/portage/package.mask
> as I could not make my Laptop, with an ATI-videocard, work with the new
> modular X.
>
> Any suggestions on how to solve this?

Well, my suggestion would be to remove the mask and upgrade to modular 
xorg-x11. It won't be long before monolithic X will be unsupported and 
removed from the tree... My ATI video card works just fine with modular X.

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/x/x11/modular-x-howto.xml

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 503 bytes --]

On Saturday 16 September 2006 18:52, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> That's good to head.  I can't get the ATI module compiled in.  I thought I
> was doing the right thing following the howto when I put this in
> /etc/make.conf, but it gets ignored:
>     VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev ati"
> I get the first three, but not ati.
>
> Can you advise?

s/ati/radeon/

VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev radeon"

If you want the binary driver also you should add fglrx to VIDEO_CARDS too..

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Kevin O'Gorman]

On 9/17/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 September 2006 18:52, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > That's good to head. I can't get the ATI module compiled in. I thought I
> > was doing the right thing following the howto when I put this in
> > /etc/make.conf, but it gets ignored:
> > VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev ati"
> > I get the first three, but not ati.
> >
> > Can you advise?
>
> s/ati/radeon/
>
> VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev radeon"
>
> If you want the binary driver also you should add fglrx to VIDEO_CARDS too..
>
> --
> Bo Andresen

I was under the impression my video card was too old for the binary driver.
It's built into the motherboard but reports as
    ATI Technologies Inc Rage XL rev 39
does anybody know if the binary would help?

++ kevin

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2954 bytes --]

On Sunday 17 September 2006 15:53, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> On 9/17/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> > On Saturday 16 September 2006 18:52, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > > That's good to head. I can't get the ATI module compiled in. I thought
> > > I was doing the right thing following the howto when I put this in
> > > /etc/make.conf, but it gets ignored:
> > > VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev ati"
> > > I get the first three, but not ati.
> > >
> > > Can you advise?
> >
> > s/ati/radeon/
> >
> > VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev radeon"
> >
> > If you want the binary driver also you should add fglrx to VIDEO_CARDS
> > too..
> >
> > --
> > Bo Andresen
>
> I was under the impression my video card was too old for the binary driver.
> It's built into the motherboard but reports as
>     ATI Technologies Inc Rage XL rev 39
> does anybody know if the binary would help?

My Xorg log shows that the radeon driver happily deals with:
================================================
(II) R128: Driver for ATI Rage 128 chipsets:
        ATI Rage 128 Mobility M3 LE (PCI), ATI Rage 128 Mobility M3 LF (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Mobility M4 MF (AGP), ATI Rage 128 Mobility M4 ML (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PA (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PB (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PC (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PD (PCI),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PE (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PF (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PG (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PH (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PI (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PJ (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PK (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PL (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PM (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PN (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PO (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PP (PCI),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PQ (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PR (PCI),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PS (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PT (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PU (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PV (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PW (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PX (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 GL RE (PCI), ATI Rage 128 GL RF (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 RG (AGP), ATI Rage 128 VR RK (PCI),
        ATI Rage 128 VR RL (AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SE (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 4X SF (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SG (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 4X SH (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SK (PCI/AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 4X SL (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SM (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 4X SN (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TF (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TL (AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TR (AGP),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TS (AGP?), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TT (AGP?),
        ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TU (AGP?)
================================================

Not sure what the proprietary ati driver covers, but their website should 
offer some info.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Kevin O'Gorman]

On 9/17/06, Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 17 September 2006 15:53, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > On 9/17/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> > > On Saturday 16 September 2006 18:52, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > > > That's good to head. I can't get the ATI module compiled in. I thought
> > > > I was doing the right thing following the howto when I put this in
> > > > /etc/make.conf, but it gets ignored:
> > > > VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev ati"
> > > > I get the first three, but not ati.
> > > >
> > > > Can you advise?
> > >
> > > s/ati/radeon/
> > >
> > > VIDEO_CARDS="vga vesa fbdev radeon"
> > >
> > > If you want the binary driver also you should add fglrx to VIDEO_CARDS
> > > too..
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bo Andresen
> >
> > I was under the impression my video card was too old for the binary driver.
> > It's built into the motherboard but reports as
> >     ATI Technologies Inc Rage XL rev 39
> > does anybody know if the binary would help?
>
> My Xorg log shows that the radeon driver happily deals with:
> ================================================
> (II) R128: Driver for ATI Rage 128 chipsets:
>         ATI Rage 128 Mobility M3 LE (PCI), ATI Rage 128 Mobility M3 LF (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Mobility M4 MF (AGP), ATI Rage 128 Mobility M4 ML (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PA (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PB (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PC (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PD (PCI),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PE (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro GL PF (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PG (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PH (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PI (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PJ (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PK (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PL (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PM (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PN (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PO (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PP (PCI),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PQ (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PR (PCI),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PS (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PT (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PU (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PV (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PW (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro VR PX (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 GL RE (PCI), ATI Rage 128 GL RF (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 RG (AGP), ATI Rage 128 VR RK (PCI),
>         ATI Rage 128 VR RL (AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SE (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 4X SF (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SG (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 4X SH (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SK (PCI/AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 4X SL (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 4X SM (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 4X SN (PCI/AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TF (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TL (AGP), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TR (AGP),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TS (AGP?), ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TT (AGP?),
>         ATI Rage 128 Pro ULTRA TU (AGP?)
> ================================================
>
> Not sure what the proprietary ati driver covers, but their website should
> offer some info.
> --
> Regards,
> Mick

Thanks all.  I added "r128" which seemed the closest to what I actually have,
and I'm now back running with everything coming up on reboot.  I may fool with
the proprietary driver, but it doesn't matter too much -- my use does not stress
the video performance much.  I just want it to work.

++ kevin

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Ryan Tandy]

Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> I was under the impression my video card was too old for the binary driver.
> It's built into the motherboard but reports as
>    ATI Technologies Inc Rage XL rev 39
> does anybody know if the binary would help?
> 
> ++ kevin
> 
You want VIDEO_CARDS="mach64".  Be warned that this driver is still 
experimental.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Kevin O'Gorman]

On 9/17/06, Ryan Tandy <tarpman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > I was under the impression my video card was too old for the binary driver.
> > It's built into the motherboard but reports as
> >    ATI Technologies Inc Rage XL rev 39
> > does anybody know if the binary would help?
> >
> > ++ kevin
> >
> You want VIDEO_CARDS="mach64".  Be warned that this driver is still
> experimental.

Thanks, Randy.  I've already gotten it working with "r128"; I wonder which is
better (if there's indeed a difference).

Do you know anyplace I could read up on this driver?

++ kevin

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Problems after reemerging xorg-x11

[Walter Dnes]

On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:23:27AM -0700, Kevin O'Gorman wrote

> Thanks all.  I added "r128" which seemed the closest to what I
> actually have, and I'm now back running with everything coming up
> on reboot.  I may fool with the proprietary driver, but it doesn't
> matter too much -- my use does not stress the video performance much.
> I just want it to work.

  A booby-trap here... if it doesn't say "Rage 128", it's *NOT* an R128
chip.  I know "Rage Pro" is Mach64, and I believe "Rage XL" is also a
Mach64 chip.  http://www.ati.com/products/embedded/ragexl/features.html
says that the Rage XL has a 64-bit path, which implies Mach64.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> In linux /sbin/init is Job #1
My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list