Follow-ups set to gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.general
On my #2 PC, I had finally given up on preupgrading. I copied /home/btth onto an external hard drive; did a fresh install; copied /home/btth back (and did "chown -R btth:btth" on it just in case); did a lot of customizing; did a PackageKit update, which called for rebooting; did the reboot. That failed.
Somewhere among all the above, I got disgusted with the display, which turned out to be 800x600 -- despite being connected directly (no KVM switch!) to the 1680x1050 monitor. The app I tried to correct with turned out (later, on another machine) *not* to be system-config-display, but something called "gnome-display-properties"; so I edited 1680x1050 into xorg.conf.
When I reboot, the boot messages look normal to me, except for the left edge being truncated by one character -- until it hits this line :
"[r]egistering binary handler for Windows applications [OK]"
At that point the whole display flashes, several times per second for several seconds -- and then everything stops.
I can get into the machine with ssh.
I did; became root; took "Windows applications" with upper case W as a clue; commanded "yum update wine"; and found wine up to date. I tried "yum update samba" -- and found samba available but not installed.
Still as root by way of ssh, I tried editing xorg.conf, but saw nothing to change.
I tried googling the whole message above. That got surprisingly few hits, all or nearly all in the Far East -- with a couple in what looks like some Indonesian language, and several with a line I believe to be Japanese, but otherwise all format of some enigmatic sort, and no text.
So I took one more shot :
[root@Hbsk X11]# system-config-display Couldn't start X server on card 0 Couldn't start X server with old config, trying with a fresh configuration Couldn't start X server on card 0 Error, failed to start X server. [root@Hbsk X11]#
Now what??
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 17:10:51 +0000 (UTC) BeartoothThpd30 wrote:
"[r]egistering binary handler for Windows applications [OK]"
At that point the whole display flashes, several times per second for several seconds -- and then everything stops.
I'm pretty sure wine is merely the last thing that runs before it tries to start the X server, and that flashing is s symptom of the X server dying. Since you can ssh in, you might find hints in the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file about what it doesn't like.
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 12:19:04 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote: [....]
I'm pretty sure wine is merely the last thing that runs before it tries to start the X server, and that flashing is s symptom of the X server dying. Since you can ssh in, you might find hints in the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file about what it doesn't like.
The whole log is pretty much Geek to me; but here's a passage that sounds like it might be relevant :
(==) ModulePath set to "/usr/lib/xorg/modules" (II) Cannot locate a core pointer device. (II) The server relies on HAL to provide the list of input devices. If no devices become available, reconfigure HAL or disable AllowEmptyInput. (WW) AllowEmptyInput is on, devices using drivers 'kbd', 'mouse' or 'vmmouse' will be disabled. (WW) Disabling Keyboard0 (II) Loader magic: 0x821b0a0 (II) Module ABI versions: X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4 X.Org Video Driver: 6.0 X.Org XInput driver : 7.0 X.Org Server Extension : 2.0 (--) using VT number 7
Then near the end comes another passage of possible interest :
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 02@00:00:0 The PCI device has a kernel module claiming it. This driver cannot operate until it has been unloaded (EE) No devices detected.
Fatal server error: no screens found
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:44:51 +0000 (UTC) BeartoothThpd30 wrote:
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 02@00:00:0 The PCI device has a kernel module claiming it. This driver cannot operate until it has been unloaded (EE) No devices detected.
Never seen that stuff before, but it sounds bad :-(.
I guess if I were trying to fix the system I'd first spend a lot of time cursing at it, then try renaming the /etc/X11/xorg.conf file (if there is one) to something else and rebooting. If that got some kind of video going, I'd try "yum install system-config-display" then run system-config-display to see if it would let me configure the video mode I really wanted. After that, I guess I'd fall back to more cursing :-).
BeartoothThpd30 wrote:
Follow-ups set to gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.general
On my #2 PC, I had finally given up on preupgrading. I copied /home/btth onto an external hard drive; did a fresh install; copied /home/btth back (and did "chown -R btth:btth" on it just in case); did a lot of customizing; did a PackageKit update, which called for rebooting; did the reboot. That failed.
Somewhere among all the above, I got disgusted with the display, which turned out to be 800x600 -- despite being connected directly (no KVM switch!) to the 1680x1050 monitor. The app I tried to correct with turned out (later, on another machine) *not* to be system-config-display, but something called "gnome-display-properties"; so I edited 1680x1050 into xorg.conf.
Right about this point I cringe, I have had bad luck editing xorg.conf in recent Fedora. In general Fedora will like you better if you don't have xorg.conf, which may have been related to part of the problem. At the recommendation of a number of people I use system-config-hardware to be sure the display type is set right, the the Preferences->Display to set the resolution. Failing in this use system-config-display --xorg to create a new file, then edit that. Only needed to do that on one machine.
I make no claim to be an expert, I just have learned not to shoot myself in the foot.
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:53:22 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
BeartoothThpd30 wrote:
Follow-ups set to gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.general
[....]
Somewhere among all the above, I got disgusted with the display, which turned out to be 800x600 -- despite being connected directly (no KVM switch!) to the 1680x1050 monitor. The app I tried to correct with turned out (later, on another machine) *not* to be system-config-display, but something called "gnome-display-properties"; so I edited 1680x1050 into xorg.conf.
Right about this point I cringe, I have had bad luck editing xorg.conf in recent Fedora.
I hear you loud & clear; I've spent a lot of miserable time in that durance vile, on and off this list. Otoh, thanks to this discussion, I'm back on the machine now.
In general Fedora will like you better if you don't have xorg.conf, which may have been related to part of the problem.
That's news. I knew that it no longer existed by default ...
At the recommendation of a number of people I use system-config-hardware to be sure the display type is set right,
How do you get that? Neither yum nor PackageKit (nor yet "yum whatprovides") seem to know aught of it.
the the Preferences->Display to set the resolution. Failing in this use system-config-display --xorg to create a new file, then edit that. Only needed to do that on one machine.
I got an error message denying the existence of " --xorg"
I make no claim to be an expert, I just have learned not to shoot myself in the foot.
Between your post and Tom Horsley's, I happened to think of changing the driver -- and did, from nv to vesa. I don't now recall exactly what all else I did, but I do remember an oddity.
At one point, I tried again to edit xorg.conf, and got a message saying it didn't exist. I ran system-config-display instead to create one -- and it did, with vesa instead of nv.
After all that, I can still only set the display up to 1280x1024, not 1680x1050 (which this machine, I'm sure, did support before). But that's within the monitor's own ability to adapt to.
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:22:17 +0000, I BeartoothHOS wrote: [....]
Between your post and Tom Horsley's, I happened to think of changing the driver -- and did, from nv to vesa. I don't now recall exactly what all else I did, but I do remember an oddity.
At one point, I tried again to edit xorg.conf, and got a message saying it didn't exist. I ran system-config-display instead to create one -- and it did, with vesa instead of nv.
After all that, I can still only set the display up to 1280x1024, not 1680x1050 (which this machine, I'm sure, did support before). But that's within the monitor's own ability to adapt to.
The same thing happened last night and this morning with my #1 machine, and the same mitigation worked : vesa instead of nv, and 1280x1024 instead of 1680x1050, with at leas one stage having been done with ssh from another machine. (I didn't think soon enough to try booting it into init 3; my guess is that that'd've worked too.)
BeartoothHOS wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:53:22 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
the the Preferences->Display to set the resolution. Failing in this use system-config-display --xorg to create a new file, then edit that. Only needed to do that on one machine.
I got an error message denying the existence of " --xorg"
Wow, did I misremember that one. The method is "Xorg -configure" and must be run as root.
I make no claim to be an expert, I just have learned not to shoot myself in the foot.
Between your post and Tom Horsley's, I happened to think of changing the driver -- and did, from nv to vesa. I don't now recall exactly what all else I did, but I do remember an oddity.
At one point, I tried again to edit xorg.conf, and got a message saying it didn't exist. I ran system-config-display instead to create one -- and it did, with vesa instead of nv.
After all that, I can still only set the display up to 1280x1024, not 1680x1050 (which this machine, I'm sure, did support before). But that's within the monitor's own ability to adapt to.
What does System->admin->display say in the display tab? I find that I need to manually set that sometimes. I think I said system->config->display the first time, had the wrong WM in front of me.
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:12:10 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote: [...]
What does System->admin->display say in the display tab? I find that I need to manually set that sometimes. I think I said system->config->display the first time, had the wrong WM in front of me.
On the first tab (Settings), it tells me I have a setting of 1280x1024 (offering only smaller others), and millions of colors; on the second (Hardware), it acknowledges what I think I told it -- that I have an LCD panel 1680x1050. (Iirc, it had supposed I had a CRT; at least one machine did.)
BeartoothHOS wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:12:10 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote: [...]
What does System->admin->display say in the display tab? I find that I need to manually set that sometimes. I think I said system->config->display the first time, had the wrong WM in front of me.
On the first tab (Settings), it tells me I have a setting of 1280x1024 (offering only smaller others), and millions of colors; on the second (Hardware), it acknowledges what I think I told it -- that I have an LCD panel 1680x1050. (Iirc, it had supposed I had a CRT; at least one machine did.)
What I have been doing is use the admin->display to get the display type right, check the video card (never had to change it), and then I could set size in the system->prefderences->hardware->screenResolution. If that sequence doesn't show the large sizes I have no other tricks (and haven't needed them to date).
-
Beartooth -
Bill Davidsen -
Tom Horsley