Re: Matrox G-450 Under X Vers. 3.3.6

2001-11-22 Thread Chris Majewski
"Rafe B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Related question: Does it make any sense to try grafting > X version 4.1 on top of this "potato" version That's what I do. Some purists will tell you not to, of course. One gotcha with "grafting" stuff on top of debian is that if you do a dist-upgrade, t

Re: Matrox G-450 Under X Vers. 3.3.6

2001-11-15 Thread Frank Zimmermann
I'm using potato 2.2r3 (or is that "2.2.18pre21"). Whatever. I recently switched to a Matrox G-450 AGP card. (Thanks to those who helped me "turn off X.") Question: can I expect that the X driver module for the Matrox G-400 will work? Has anyone tried this? (The G-450 isn't offered as a cho

Re: Matrox G-450 Under X Vers. 3.3.6

2001-11-14 Thread Patrick McFarland
There is basically no point not running Xf4 with a card like that. You will get no 3d acceleration, and matrox doesnt officially support Xf3 anymore. I suggest you just run woody. You will also want to run a 2.4 kernel to get dri/drm working well. On 14-Nov-2001, Rafe B. wrote: > > I'm using p

Matrox G-450 Under X Vers. 3.3.6

2001-11-14 Thread Rafe B.
I'm using potato 2.2r3 (or is that "2.2.18pre21"). Whatever. I recently switched to a Matrox G-450 AGP card. (Thanks to those who helped me "turn off X.") Question: can I expect that the X driver module for the Matrox G-400 will work? Has anyone tried this? (The G-450 isn't offered as a