🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <bJ4WAAAwX$04EwqR@btinternet.com>,
	Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes:
> Puzzling problem, in Red Had 6.1, when the display is updated (typing,
> mouse moving) it makes it wobble slightly.  This does not happen in
> Windows and I want to fix it, it's making me feel ill.
> 
> It did it on my old motherboard, it did it on my old (G200) graphics
> card.  I've updated everything I can think of (hard and software) and it
> still bloody does it.
> 
> It's a Millennium G400 32MB in an Abit BP6 with kernel 2.2.14 compiled
> for SMP.

which version of X are you running, 3.3.1 or higher?
presume you are using SVGA server (silly question)
somewhere buried in /usr/X11R6 ae a load of docs related to various cards and various issues, actually with a G400 you would probably need to use 3.3.4 or higher I would think

-- 
Martin Smith

In article <lff8b8.ec.ln@chiron-s.demon.co.uk>, Martin Smith
<martin@chiron-s.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <bJ4WAAAwX$04EwqR@btinternet.com>,
>       Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes:
>> Puzzling problem, in Red Had 6.1, when the display is updated (typing,
>> mouse moving) it makes it wobble slightly.  This does not happen in
>> Windows and I want to fix it, it's making me feel ill.
>> 
>> It did it on my old motherboard, it did it on my old (G200) graphics
>> card.  I've updated everything I can think of (hard and software) and it
>> still bloody does it.
>> 
>> It's a Millennium G400 32MB in an Abit BP6 with kernel 2.2.14 compiled
>> for SMP.
>
>which version of X are you running, 3.3.1 or higher?
>presume you are using SVGA server (silly question)
>somewhere buried in /usr/X11R6 ae a load of docs related to various cards and 
>various issues, actually with a G400 you would probably need to use 3.3.4 or 
>higher I would think

I am using the server that came with Red Hat 6.1.   I will investigate
later which version that is, I have a feeling it is 3.3.4, in fact I
know it's 3.3.4 since I remember downloading it specially.

As a side note, "upgrading" from Red Hat 6.0 to 6.1 managed to
successfully trash most of the services running on my server.  Hmmm,
where to look when DHCP fails, SMB dies and NFS has gone completely mad.
I've sorted all but the last one, NFS is being daft.  It's showmounting
that /usr and /opt are shared *(ro) and that's what exports says but
gives permission denied when I try to mount them (ooer) and refuses also
to share /home/tombird with the entry:
/home/tombird   teamserver(rw,no_root_squash)
in /etc/exports.  This WORKED before I upgraded, yet another example of
"if it ain't broke, don't bloody go near it".

So it managed to quite successfully bring down a network of about 9
machines (at last count) congratulations Red Hat, even unpatched NT4 has
a hard time topping that one (although it made a valiant effort last
time managing to destroy network neighbourhood on all the machines).

TB               Busby the Cat 1984 - 22.9.1999

.. and it came to pass that Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.c
o.uk> uttered forth:
<snip wobbly display problem>
>
>It's a Millennium G400 32MB in an Abit BP6 with kernel 2.2.14 compiled
>for SMP.
>
>TB               Busby the Cat 1984 - 22.9.1999

Can't help here - but noticed that RH6.1 chucking X through an
S3TrioV2/DX also seemed to wobble slightly at higher
frequencies on my build also.

Have you posted the same question in any of the Linux
newsgroups? alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions has quite a few
HW/Linux experts.
-- 
 
"Dungeon" Dave, in anti-harvest mode...

From: abuse@yahoo.com
From: abuse@btinternet.com
From: *@localhost

In article <bJ4WAAAwX$04EwqR@btinternet.com>,
	Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes:
snipped
> It's a Millennium G400 32MB in an Abit BP6 with kernel 2.2.14 compiled
> for SMP.

I forgot to ask, which wm are you running, it wouldnt happen to be e would it as I
have had no end of shakiness with that, in fact I dont use it
unless I fancy a bit of eye candy, fvwm2 does me nicely

-- 
Martin Smith

In article <OMjDxCAWCa24EwIE@btinternet.com>,
	Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article <lff8b8.ec.ln@chiron-s.demon.co.uk>, Martin Smith
> 
> So it managed to quite successfully bring down a network of about 9
> machines (at last count) congratulations Red Hat, even unpatched NT4 has
> a hard time topping that one (although it made a valiant effort last
> time managing to destroy network neighbourhood on all the machines).

not wishing to start a religious war but you might find that the FreeBSD upgrade
path is abit easier

-- 
Martin Smith

In article <38DB183D.C57DA405@aber.ac.uk>,
	DUNCAN PHILLIP THOMAS <dpt8@aber.ac.uk> writes:
> Tom Bird wrote:
> 
>> yet another example of
>> "if it ain't broke, don't bloody go near it".
> 
> You don't subscribe to the "if it ain't broke it ain't got enough
> features yet" paradgm then?

just wait for the M$ distro of linux

-- 
Martin Smith

Tom Bird wrote:

> yet another example of
> "if it ain't broke, don't bloody go near it".

You don't subscribe to the "if it ain't broke it ain't got enough
features yet" paradgm then?


-- 
Duncan Thomas        dpt8@aber.ac.uk

This message is for infomational or entertainment purposes only. The
views contained herein should not necessarily be construded as the views
of myself or any other party, including UW Aberystwyth.

In article <41tgb8.t9.ln@chiron-s.demon.co.uk>, Martin Smith
<martin@chiron-s.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <OMjDxCAWCa24EwIE@btinternet.com>,
>       Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes:
>> In article <lff8b8.ec.ln@chiron-s.demon.co.uk>, Martin Smith
>> 
>> So it managed to quite successfully bring down a network of about 9
>> machines (at last count) congratulations Red Hat, even unpatched NT4 has
>> a hard time topping that one (although it made a valiant effort last
>> time managing to destroy network neighbourhood on all the machines).
>
>not wishing to start a religious war but you might find that the FreeBSD upgrade
>path is abit easier

I downloaded the FreeBSD CD image and it looks "promising".  The X
support was second to none with all the latest servers and window
managers (and associated libraries) but the rest of it isn't quite up to
scratch yet.  The kernel doesn't (officially) do SMP and it didn't want
to know about my cheapy 100Mbps Realtek network card.

I eagerly await version 4.00.

TB               Busby the Cat 1984 - 22.9.1999

Tom Bird wrote:

> I downloaded the FreeBSD CD image and it looks "promising".  The X
> support was second to none with all the latest servers and window
> managers (and associated libraries) but the rest of it isn't quite up to
> scratch yet.

What doesn't look up to scratch about it? Which CD image did you
download by the way?

> The kernel doesn't (officially) do SMP

First I've heard of it (but then I have no SMP machines, so I haven't
investigated it much). I think the SMP support in -current has just been
improved, and may well be merged to -stable in time for 4.1.

> and it didn't want to know about my cheapy 100Mbps Realtek network
> card.

That would surprise me. How does Linux identify your card? If it's an
RTL8139 try the "rl" driver. FreeBSD is certainly happy enough with my
cheapy 10/100 Realtek 8139 card. (I only use it at 10Mbps though, and
all the other machines use Realtek 8029, aka NE2000 compatible.)

> I eagerly await version 4.00.

I thought it was already released, though I got a bit lost with all the
delays.

-- 
Ben Smithurst / ben@scientia.demon.co.uk / PGP: 0x99392F7D

In article <slrn8e2626.2klm.ben@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk>,
	ben@scientia.demon.co.uk (Ben Smithurst) writes:
> Tom Bird wrote:
> 
>> I eagerly await version 4.00.
> 
> I thought it was already released, though I got a bit lost with all the
> delays.
> 

The 4.0 iso image is available for download from ftp.freebsd.org, if you have nice fast line

-- 
Martin Smith

In article <slrn8e2626.2klm.ben@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk>, Ben
Smithurst <ben@scientia.demon.co.uk> writes
>Tom Bird wrote:
>
>> I downloaded the FreeBSD CD image and it looks "promising".  The X
>> support was second to none with all the latest servers and window
>> managers (and associated libraries) but the rest of it isn't quite up to
>> scratch yet.
>
>What doesn't look up to scratch about it? Which CD image did you
>download by the way?

It didn't like my 486's network card (Realtek 8019) which is supposedly
NE2000 compatible, completely missed the replacement I found for it
which was stamped "Netware Certified" and known working, both cards had
at some time worked perfectly under Linux on the same machine, no decent
/proc stuff, shite default shell.  I suppose it's 90% me being used to
Linux.

Apart from stuff like that it was sort of fun.

I think I got version 3.4.

>> The kernel doesn't (officially) do SMP
>
>First I've heard of it (but then I have no SMP machines, so I haven't
>investigated it much). I think the SMP support in -current has just been
>improved, and may well be merged to -stable in time for 4.1.
>
>> and it didn't want to know about my cheapy 100Mbps Realtek network
>> card.
>
>That would surprise me. How does Linux identify your card? If it's an
>RTL8139 try the "rl" driver. FreeBSD is certainly happy enough with my
>cheapy 10/100 Realtek 8139 card. (I only use it at 10Mbps though, and
>all the other machines use Realtek 8029, aka NE2000 compatible.)

It's an RTL8139 straight into a 100Mbps switch.  I didn't play that long
really, I'm sure I could have persuaded it eventually.

>> I eagerly await version 4.00.
>
>I thought it was already released, though I got a bit lost with all the
>delays.

Might have been but I couldn't get the CD image.

TB               Busby the Cat 1984 - 22.9.1999

Tom Bird wrote:

> It didn't like my 486's network card (Realtek 8019) which is supposedly
> NE2000 compatible, completely missed the replacement I found for it
> which was stamped "Netware Certified" and known working, both cards had
> at some time worked perfectly under Linux on the same machine, no decent
> /proc stuff, shite default shell.  I suppose it's 90% me being used to
> Linux.

I don't know about the network card. I kind of agree that Linux's /proc
is kinda nice, but I'm sure you can get all the information somewhere
else in FreeBSD (perhaps I'm strange in thinking filesystems are for
storing files more than anything else).

As for the default shell, I thought the same about Linux. *bash* ?
ugh. I'd guess the reason for not changing it to something good like
zsh is that there would inevitably be arguments about *which* shell by
making default. By making it a minimal /bin/sh, the users quickly think
"ugh, this is shite" (like you did) and install their preferred shell
from ports as part of the installation procedure. (Also, people are less
likely to write scripts starting with "#!/bin/sh" and then use loads of
bash specific stuff.) Perhaps it would be nice if the default install
explicitly said at some point "which shell do you want?" and gave a list
of bash, zsh, tcsh, ksh, whatever else there is.  Still, I know where to
send the patches...

>> That would surprise me. How does Linux identify your card? If it's an
>> RTL8139 try the "rl" driver. FreeBSD is certainly happy enough with my
>> cheapy 10/100 Realtek 8139 card. (I only use it at 10Mbps though, and
>> all the other machines use Realtek 8029, aka NE2000 compatible.)
>
> It's an RTL8139 straight into a 100Mbps switch.  I didn't play that long
> really, I'm sure I could have persuaded it eventually.

That should work, I'm sure if you care enough someone could help you. I'd
start by asking what "dmesg | grep rl" says.

> Might have been but I couldn't get the CD image.

I think the problems are being ironed out before it's made (maybe it's
ready now).

-- 
Ben Smithurst / ben@scientia.demon.co.uk / PGP: 0x99392F7D

Ben Smithurst (ben@scientia.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Tom Bird wrote:

: > It didn't like my 486's network card (Realtek 8019) which is supposedly
: > NE2000 compatible, completely missed the replacement I found for it
: > which was stamped "Netware Certified" and known working, both cards had
: > at some time worked perfectly under Linux on the same machine, no decent
: > /proc stuff, shite default shell.  I suppose it's 90% me being used to
: > Linux.

: I don't know about the network card. I kind of agree that Linux's /proc
: is kinda nice, but I'm sure you can get all the information somewhere
: else in FreeBSD (perhaps I'm strange in thinking filesystems are for
: storing files more than anything else).

Of course filesystems are means of accessing files.
It's unix everything's a file.

-- 
Mike Cavanagh.

http://i.am/purple

.. and it came to pass that mike <mike@emgee.co.uk> uttered
forth:
>
>Of course filesystems are means of accessing files.
>It's unix everything's a file.
>
...an idea which seems to have been nicked by the Gates
Foundation, as objects are appearing in an explorer window as
files since 1995...
-- 
 
"Dungeon" Dave, in anti-harvest mode...

From: abuse@yahoo.com
From: abuse@btinternet.com
From: *@localhost

martin@chiron-s.demon.co.uk (Martin Smith) writes:

> In article <38DB183D.C57DA405@aber.ac.uk>,
> 	DUNCAN PHILLIP THOMAS <dpt8@aber.ac.uk> writes:
> > Tom Bird wrote:
> > 
> >> yet another example of
> >> "if it ain't broke, don't bloody go near it".
> > 
> > You don't subscribe to the "if it ain't broke it ain't got enough
> > features yet" paradgm then?
> 
> just wait for the M$ distro of linux

You misspelled `GNU diffutils'. HTH. HAND.

-- 
`> KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
 You must have some, but I don't see any evidence of it.'
   --- Craig Hardie flames a luser recruitment consultant
       advertising `Microsoft based solutions' on uk.comp.os.linux

mike@emgee.co.uk (mike) writes:

> Ben Smithurst (ben@scientia.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : Tom Bird wrote:
> 
> : > It didn't like my 486's network card (Realtek 8019) which is supposedly
> : > NE2000 compatible, completely missed the replacement I found for it
> : > which was stamped "Netware Certified" and known working, both cards had
> : > at some time worked perfectly under Linux on the same machine, no decent
> : > /proc stuff, shite default shell.  I suppose it's 90% me being used to
> : > Linux.
> 
> : I don't know about the network card. I kind of agree that Linux's /proc
> : is kinda nice, but I'm sure you can get all the information somewhere
> : else in FreeBSD (perhaps I'm strange in thinking filesystems are for
> : storing files more than anything else).
> 
> Of course filesystems are means of accessing files.
> It's unix everything's a file.

And in Linux-2.2.50+, or thereabouts, SysVIPC SHM segments are also
files, in /var/shm.

-- 
`> KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
 You must have some, but I don't see any evidence of it.'
   --- Craig Hardie flames a luser recruitment consultant
       advertising `Microsoft based solutions' on uk.comp.os.linux

In article <vhBUxSAs9R54EwnS@ghastly.demon.co.uk>,
'Dungeon' Dave  <Dungeon@Ghastly.Demon.Co.UK> wrote:
>.. and it came to pass that mike <mike@emgee.co.uk> uttered
>forth:
>>
>>Of course filesystems are means of accessing files.
>>It's unix everything's a file.
>>
>...an idea which seems to have been nicked by the Gates
>Foundation, as objects are appearing in an explorer window as
>files since 1995...

In OS/2, everything's an object anyway ...

N.

'Dungeon' Dave <Dungeon@spamnot.here> wrote:
> .. and it came to pass that mike <mike@emgee.co.uk> uttered
> forth:
>>
>>Of course filesystems are means of accessing files.
>>It's unix everything's a file.
>>
> ...an idea which seems to have been nicked by the Gates
> Foundation, as objects are appearing in an explorer window as
> files since 1995...

Is there anything this criminal mob have actually
invented for themselves?

Mark Evans <mpe@anacon.demon.co.uk> wrote:


>Is there anything this criminal mob have actually
>invented for themselves?

The Microsoft Assistant....."you seem to be typing a letter..."

Gareth

In article <38f47f60.38232785@news.giganews.com>,
	gareth@uberdog.net (Gareth Jones) writes:
> Mark Evans <mpe@anacon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Is there anything this criminal mob have actually
>>invented for themselves?
> 
> The Microsoft Assistant....."you seem to be typing a letter..."
> 

but its the wrong one!

-- 
Martin Smith

In article <38f47f60.38232785@news.giganews.com>,
Gareth Jones <gareth@uberdog.net> wrote:
>Mark Evans <mpe@anacon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Is there anything this criminal mob have actually
>>invented for themselves?
>
>The Microsoft Assistant....."you seem to be typing a letter..."

"Do you want me to

o totally balls it up for you automatically 
o pop up at random and irritate you to distraction ?"

Nick
-- 
http://www.leverton.org/             The power of the Beat 'n the Rhythm ...

nick@leverton.org (Nick Leverton) writes:

> In article <38f47f60.38232785@news.giganews.com>,
> Gareth Jones <gareth@uberdog.net> wrote:
> >The Microsoft Assistant....."you seem to be typing a letter..."
> 
> "Do you want me to
> 
> o totally balls it up for you automatically 
> o pop up at random and irritate you to distraction ?"

Naaah. vigor does it better.

`Your blood pressure just went up a point.'

(And it crashes even more than Word, too. I'm not sure whether to call
this a bug, or a feature.)

-- 
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
 flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
 utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew

In article <8d2qal$78j$1@linux.warren.demon.co.uk>, Nick Leverton
<nick@leverton.org> writes
>In article <38f47f60.38232785@news.giganews.com>,
>Gareth Jones <gareth@uberdog.net> wrote:
>>Mark Evans <mpe@anacon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Is there anything this criminal mob have actually
>>>invented for themselves?
>>
>>The Microsoft Assistant....."you seem to be typing a letter..."

>o pop up at random and irritate you to distraction ?"

Do a funny little dance occasionally & make you wonder (if involved in
some complicated thing) if you really *are* doing it the easiest way &
that someone at MS has programmed it to do that when it knows you aren't
(but will refuse to reveal if questioned) 
'Tap' in the screen, light a bulb to indicate what a great idea you've
got, but actually leads you off on what eventually turns out to be a
totally irrelevant side track.
Mentioning the word 'fax' causes it to think I want to send one!  
-- 
John Chapple