// Forwarded because I don't have a brain...
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:28:18 Gareth Hughes wrote:
> It's not hard to get something rather more powerful than a Rage Pro --
> anandtech.com lists current-generation hardware for under $120. One
> would guess going back a generation or two would bring
Nick Hudson wrote:
>
>libtool: ltconfig version `' does not match ltmain.sh version `1.3.5'
>Fatal configuration error. See the libtool docs for more information.
>
if I remember right... delete/rename ltconfig and ltmain.sh
then you need to run your new libtoolize in your glide
directory."/us
Frank C. Earl wrote:
> Now, now, not everybody can use your employer's gear, Gareth... :->
It's not hard to get something rather more powerful than a Rage Pro --
anandtech.com lists current-generation hardware for under $120. One
would guess going back a generation or two would bring the pri
can someone tell me what I can do to solve this error installing Glide?
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/nhudson/glide-cvs/glide3x/swlibs/fxmisc'
/bin/sh ../../libtool --mode=compile gcc -DX11 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
-fexpensive-optimizations -ffast-math -DBIG_OPT -Wall
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 11:30 pm, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Hmm, in a day where you can get PC graphics hardware that can run Quake3
> at 1600x1200@32 with maximum quality settings at around 100 fps, perhaps
> you should reevaluate your idea of "powerful enough"...
Now, now, not everybody can
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 01:54 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> a=readl(kms->reg_aperture+MACH64_BUS_CNTL);
> writel((a | (3<<1) )&(~(1<<6)), kms->reg_aperture+MACH64_BUS_CNTL);
>
> same other code
>
> works fine. Now why would this be ?
This could be caused by t
Frank C. Earl wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 October 2001 07:17 pm, Carl Busjahn wrote:
>
>>Your depth is 24. 3D depths are only 16bit and 32bit. The Mach64 is
>>really not powerful enough to handle 32bit (which is what 24 yeilds in
>>XFree86 4.1). I'm not even sure if the driver supports 32bit dep
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 07:17 pm, Carl Busjahn wrote:
> Your depth is 24. 3D depths are only 16bit and 32bit. The Mach64 is
> really not powerful enough to handle 32bit (which is what 24 yeilds in
> XFree86 4.1). I'm not even sure if the driver supports 32bit depth, but
> it's not a good i
Hi folks,
I'm attempting to incorporate DRI's mesa-4-0-branch into my
current X 4.1.0.1 (Debian sid from X 4_1 branch) setup but am running
into difficulties. I checked out the mesa-4-0-branch and created the build
tree as the DRI compilation guide instructed (which btw is rather
!current,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 07:27:49PM -0600, Bill Currie wrote:
> Index: lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/mga/mgatexmem.c
Hmm, I seem to have lost the initial part of my message. I believe the
previous patch fixes the crashes found in the mga and a few other drivers that
have similar code.
Bill
--
Leave others
On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 02:59:11PM -0600, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Ralf, I haven't been able to test your patch, but it sounds like it works
> well for those who've tried it. If you clean it up to include just the agp
> texture stuff, I can commit it...
Index: lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/mga/mgatexmem.c
Your depth is 24. 3D depths are only 16bit and 32bit. The Mach64 is
really not powerful enough to handle 32bit (which is what 24 yeilds in
XFree86 4.1). I'm not even sure if the driver supports 32bit depth, but
it's not a good idea anyway. Plus you're going to get better overall
quality at
ralf willenbacher wrote:
>
> "B. van den Heuvel" wrote:
> >
> > But will it help if I lower my resolution ?
> >
> yep, and to reduce the color depth.
> its printed in the X log:
>
> (II) MGA(0): Reserved 12288 kb for textures at offset 0x140
>
> but i just realized that my g400 box still ru
"B. van den Heuvel" wrote:
>
> But will it help if I lower my resolution ?
>
yep, and to reduce the color depth.
its printed in the X log:
(II) MGA(0): Reserved 12288 kb for textures at offset 0x140
but i just realized that my g400 box still runs with
some patch i made.
(no, i wont pollute
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 18:37, ralf willenbacher wrote:
> "B. van den Heuvel" wrote:
> > No I'm still running at 1600x1200x32 (used that resolution in all XFree
> > versions). It's a G400 MAX with 32MB.
> > I'm suffering the same problems on a 16MB G400 running at 1280x1024x16
> > though.
>
>
"B. van den Heuvel" wrote:
> No I'm still running at 1600x1200x32 (used that resolution in all XFree
> versions). It's a G400 MAX with 32MB.
> I'm suffering the same problems on a 16MB G400 running at 1280x1024x16 though.
>
its texture swapping.
> Can my AGP size matter ?, In GLX-Utah I could s
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 16:43, ralf willenbacher wrote:
> > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Bas van den Heuvel wrote:
> > > > Hi there,
> > > >
> > > > I'm strugling with my G400 performance for months now, since the 4.1
> > > > tree. Quake 3 is just not playable at some levels,
> > > > Return to cast
> > On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Bas van den Heuvel wrote:
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > I'm strugling with my G400 performance for months now, since the 4.1
> > > tree. Quake 3 is just not playable at some levels,
> > > Return to castle wolfenstein is not playable.
> > > Soldier of fortune is not playable
Hi mach64 developers!
I grapped the new mach-0-0-2-branch yesterday and installed it
rightaway. After reducing the max resolution to 800x600 @ 24 bpp, I
could (finally) load drm. But now the drm module complains to me:
"cannot map registers", the screen stays black and the text consoles are
corrup
On Saturday 20 October 2001 18:53, you wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Bas van den Heuvel wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm strugling with my G400 performance for months now, since the 4.1
> > tree. Quake 3 is just not playable at some levels,
> > Return to castle wolfenstein is not playable.
> > S
20 matches
Mail list logo
