missing xorgcfg

[Frode Petersen]

Hi. I have a xorg config problem I'm trying to sort out. When I wanted 
to create a new xorg.conf from scratch, I discovered that xorgcfg and 
xorgconfig both were missing. Are these removed from the fedora x 
packages or do I have a faulty install?
Which package should the files be in?
Maybe you know of a template xorg.conf somewhere that has all the 
possible options listed?

Btw, the things I need to sort out are what the files and modules 
sections can and/or (must{/, not}) contain for ordinary and fglrx drivers.

Regards,
Frode

[Aaron Konstam]

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:04 +0200, Frode Petersen wrote:
> Hi. I have a xorg config problem I'm trying to sort out. When I wanted 
> to create a new xorg.conf from scratch, I discovered that xorgcfg and 
> xorgconfig both were missing. Are these removed from the fedora x 
> packages or do I have a faulty install?
> Which package should the files be in?
> Maybe you know of a template xorg.conf somewhere that has all the 
> possible options listed?
>
> Btw, the things I need to sort out are what the files and modules 
> sections can and/or (must{/, not}) contain for ordinary and fglrx drivers.
>
> Regards,
> Frode

It looks like xorg.conf comes from xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.1.1-47.7.fc6.
However, when I executed:
rpm -qf /etc/X11/xorg.conf
It said it belonged to no package. Very confusing.

xorgcfg and xorgconfig do not exist.

[Frode Petersen]

Aaron Konstam skrev:
> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:04 +0200, Frode Petersen wrote:
> > Hi. I have a xorg config problem I'm trying to sort out. When I wanted 
> > to create a new xorg.conf from scratch, I discovered that xorgcfg and 
> > xorgconfig both were missing. Are these removed from the fedora x 
> > packages or do I have a faulty install?
>
> It looks like xorg.conf comes from xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.1.1-47.7.fc6.
> However, when I executed:
> rpm -qf /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> It said it belonged to no package. Very confusing.

Thanks, I'll look there.
> xorgcfg and xorgconfig do not exist.

Hmm...these are tools for creating a new xorg.conf file from scratch; 
the first through probing the system, the other from user choices. I 
thought they were part of the standard xorg install, but I'll check up 
on that.

Thanks for the help!

Regards,
Frode

[Frode Petersen]

Frode Petersen skrev:
> Aaron Konstam skrev:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:04 +0200, Frode Petersen wrote:
> > > Hi. I have a xorg config problem I'm trying to sort out. When I 
> > > wanted to create a new xorg.conf from scratch, I discovered that 
> > > xorgcfg and xorgconfig both were missing. Are these removed from the 
> > > fedora x packages or do I have a faulty install?
> >
> > It looks like xorg.conf comes from xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.1.1-47.7.fc6.
> > However, when I executed:
> > rpm -qf /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> > It said it belonged to no package. Very confusing.
>
> Thanks, I'll look there.
> > xorgcfg and xorgconfig do not exist.
>
> Hmm...these are tools for creating a new xorg.conf file from scratch; 
> the first through probing the system, the other from user choices. I 
> thought they were part of the standard xorg install, but I'll check up 
> on that.
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
> Regards,
> Frode

It seems like Fedora/RedHat removes the standard tools in favor of 
system-config-display. An example of making normal life easier, but 
creates extra work when you want to do something out of the ordinary.

Wonder whether it would be wise to take the tools out of an official 
xorg package, don't know what dependencies exist inside that system.

I just wish removed parts could make it into Extras as a separate 
package when Fedora chooses to alter what is coming from upstream, 
unless there are incompatibilities. Then we get to choose our tools.

Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no entries in sections 
'files' and 'modules'? The only tool I know I've been toying with since 
installing FC6 is system-config-display, before that only anaconda 
during install. That's why I want the probing xorgcfg, to see what a 
normal xorg.conf for my system would look like.

Regards,
Frode

[Antonio Olivares]

--- Frode Petersen  wrote:
> Frode Petersen skrev:
> > Aaron Konstam skrev:
> > > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:04 +0200, Frode Petersen
>
> wrote:
> > > > Hi. I have a xorg config problem I'm trying to
>
> sort out. When I
> > > > wanted to create a new xorg.conf from scratch, I
>
> discovered that
> > > > xorgcfg and xorgconfig both were missing. Are
>
> these removed from the
> > > > fedora x packages or do I have a faulty install?
> > >
> > > It looks like xorg.conf comes from
>
> xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.1.1-47.7.fc6.
> > > However, when I executed:
> > > rpm -qf /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> > > It said it belonged to no package. Very
>
> confusing.
> > Thanks, I'll look there.
> > > xorgcfg and xorgconfig do not exist.
> >
> > Hmm...these are tools for creating a new xorg.conf
>
> file from scratch;
> > the first through probing the system, the other
>
> from user choices. I
> > thought they were part of the standard xorg
>
> install, but I'll check up
> > on that.
> >
> > Thanks for the help!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Frode
>
> It seems like Fedora/RedHat removes the standard
> tools in favor of 
> system-config-display. An example of making normal
> life easier, but 
> creates extra work when you want to do something out
> of the ordinary.
>
> Wonder whether it would be wise to take the tools
> out of an official 
> xorg package, don't know what dependencies exist
> inside that system.
>
> I just wish removed parts could make it into Extras
> as a separate 
> package when Fedora chooses to alter what is coming
> from upstream, 
> unless there are incompatibilities. Then we get to
> choose our tools.
>
> Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no
> entries in sections 
> 'files' and 'modules'? The only tool I know I've
> been toying with since 
> installing FC6 is system-config-display, before that
> only anaconda 
> during install. That's why I want the probing
> xorgcfg, to see what a 
> normal xorg.conf for my system would look like.
>
> Regards,
> Frode
>
> -- 
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Don't use xorgcfg if you cannot find it/or is not in
there.  You can always do

# Xorg -configure
Then test the configuration, instructions will appear
after you run Xorg -configure.  If you are
satisfied/happy with it, copy it back to
/etc/X11/xorg.conf.  That will be the normal xorg.conf
generated by xorg tools.  xorgcfg was the old way of
doing it, if I am not mistaken.

Regards,

Antonio

____________________________________________________________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate 
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367

[Frode Petersen]

Antonio Olivares skrev:
> Don't use xorgcfg if you cannot find it/or is not in
> there.

Probably sound advice.
> You can always do
>
> # Xorg -configure
> Then test the configuration, instructions will appear
> after you run Xorg -configure.  If you are
> satisfied/happy with it, copy it back to
> /etc/X11/xorg.conf.  That will be the normal xorg.conf
> generated by xorg tools.  xorgcfg was the old way of
> doing it, if I am not mistaken.

I did try that, but the Xserver kept aborting for some reason. Didn't 
try to figure out why, though. Guess I'll try that road again with a 
little more persistence this time.

Thanks for the reply.

Regards,
Frode

[Cameron Simpson]

On 03Apr2007 01:54, Frode Petersen  wrote:
| Antonio Olivares skrev:
| >You can always do
| >
| ># Xorg -configure
| >Then test the configuration, instructions will appear
| >after you run Xorg -configure.  If you are
| >satisfied/happy with it, copy it back to
| >/etc/X11/xorg.conf.  That will be the normal xorg.conf
| >generated by xorg tools.  xorgcfg was the old way of
| >doing it, if I am not mistaken.
| 
| I did try that, but the Xserver kept aborting for some reason. Didn't 
| try to figure out why, though. Guess I'll try that road again with a 
| little more persistence this time.

Yes, and I had Xorg -configure produce a suboptimal config for me just
last night (for perfectly valid reasons as far as it knew, looking at the log;
the 1024x768 res for the laptop I was setting up didn't match its idea
of available vert and horiz sync rates).

A run of system-config-display let me tell it it had a "generic 1024x768
LCD display" and all was well.

Personally, I prefer "Xorg -configure" first, and system-config-display
second. Your call.

Cheers,

[Matthew Saltzman]

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Frode Petersen wrote:
> Antonio Olivares skrev:
> > Don't use xorgcfg if you cannot find it/or is not in
> > there.
>
> Probably sound advice.
> > You can always do
> >
> > # Xorg -configure
> > Then test the configuration, instructions will appear
> > after you run Xorg -configure.  If you are
> > satisfied/happy with it, copy it back to
> > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.  That will be the normal xorg.conf
> > generated by xorg tools.  xorgcfg was the old way of
> > doing it, if I am not mistaken.
>
> I did try that, but the Xserver kept aborting for some reason. Didn't try to 
> figure out why, though. Guess I'll try that road again with a little more 
> persistence this time.
>
> Thanks for the reply.

"system-config-display --reconfig" will create xorg.conf from scratch by 
probing.
> Regards,
> Frode

[Frode Petersen]

Matthew Saltzman skrev:
> "system-config-display --reconfig" will create xorg.conf from scratch by 
> probing.

Aahh.. thank you! That one eluded me..

Regards, Frode

[Tim]

On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 00:33 +0200, Frode Petersen wrote:
> Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no entries in sections 
> 'files' and 'modules'?

I don't even have those sections.  Defaults are presumed without them.

[Frode Petersen]

Tim skrev:
> On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 00:33 +0200, Frode Petersen wrote:
> > Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no entries in sections 
> > 'files' and 'modules'?
>
> I don't even have those sections.  Defaults are presumed without them.

This makes me a bit confused. Are all the entries that used to go here 
assumed to be default settings, or are they dropped for different 
technologies?

It might be that I have an outdated model of X in my mind; is there a 
short overview somewhere of how the different parts of X connect to make 
a working environment?

I know of different parts of modern X, like cairo, dri and xft, but 
right now they are in my mind more like a box of loose Lego pieces than 
a model pieced together. I kind of lack the mental map of the X system.

Regards,
Frode

[Tim]

Frode Petersen:
> > > Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no entries in sections 
> > > 'files' and 'modules'?

Tim:
> > I don't even have those sections.  Defaults are presumed without them.

Frode Petersen:
> This makes me a bit confused. Are all the entries that used to go here 
> assumed to be default settings, or are they dropped for different 
> technologies?

It seems that more defaults are presumed, and a fair bit of
auto-configuring each boot.  That latter's caused me problems, when I've
turned on a system with the monitor un-powered.  When turned on, I had a
generic 800x600 display, instead of the prior 1280x1084.  And I kept on
getting the same issue with a monitor that it didn't have in its
database, until I preset it with more details.

After playing around over the last few days, this appears to be a
minimal configuration set up by Fedora:

# Xorg configuration created by system-config-display

Section "ServerLayout"
        Identifier     "single head configuration"
        Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
        InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
        Identifier  "Keyboard0"
        Driver      "kbd"
        Option      "XkbModel" "pc105"
        Option      "XkbLayout" "us"
EndSection

Section "Device"
        Identifier  "Videocard0"
        Driver      "nv"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
        Identifier "Screen0"
        Device     "Videocard0"
        DefaultDepth     24
        SubSection "Display"
                Viewport   0 0
                Depth     24
        EndSubSection
EndSection

About the only specific thing in it was the "nv" driver.  It beats me
why a keyboard ought to be part of the X configuration, though I do see
reason behind configuring a mouse in there.  It's struck me for quite
some time that the mouse port ought to be part of the graphic card, more
than anything else.  Let *it* work out where the pointer is, in
hardware.

[Phil Meyer]

Tim wrote:
> Frode Petersen:
> > > > Btw, have anyone else got a xorg.conf with no entries in sections 
> > > > 'files' and 'modules'?
>
> Tim:
> > > I don't even have those sections.  Defaults are presumed without them.
>
> Frode Petersen:
> > This makes me a bit confused. Are all the entries that used to go here 
> > assumed to be default settings, or are they dropped for different 
> > technologies?
>
> It seems that more defaults are presumed, and a fair bit of
> auto-configuring each boot.  That latter's caused me problems, when I've
> turned on a system with the monitor un-powered.  When turned on, I had a
> generic 800x600 display, instead of the prior 1280x1084.  And I kept on
> getting the same issue with a monitor that it didn't have in its
> database, until I preset it with more details.
>
> After playing around over the last few days, this appears to be a
> minimal configuration set up by Fedora:
>
> # Xorg configuration created by system-config-display
>
> Section "ServerLayout"
>         Identifier     "single head configuration"
>         Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0
>         InputDevice    "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
> EndSection
>
> Section "InputDevice"
>         Identifier  "Keyboard0"
>         Driver      "kbd"
>         Option      "XkbModel" "pc105"
>         Option      "XkbLayout" "us"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Device"
>         Identifier  "Videocard0"
>         Driver      "nv"
> EndSection
>
> Section "Screen"
>         Identifier "Screen0"
>         Device     "Videocard0"
>         DefaultDepth     24
>         SubSection "Display"
>                 Viewport   0 0
>                 Depth     24
>         EndSubSection
> EndSection
>
> About the only specific thing in it was the "nv" driver.  It beats me
> why a keyboard ought to be part of the X configuration, though I do see
> reason behind configuring a mouse in there.  It's struck me for quite
> some time that the mouse port ought to be part of the graphic card, more
> than anything else.  Let *it* work out where the pointer is, in
> hardware.

Most xorg and commercial drivers try to determine the best values to 
set  by querying the monitor itself when the driver starts.

This method ignores any setting you have specified for resolution.

So you don't need a detailed xorg.conf any more for most monitors, but 
on the other hand, the default behavior of querying the monitor is not 
optimal in every instance.

The protocol and dataset are called 'EDID'.  If your monitor responds to 
an EDID request then most current drivers will do what the EDID data 
suggests.

Look in your /var/log/Xorg.0.log for the string 'EDID'.
A few lines below that you will see something like:

Virtual size is NNNNxNNNN

NNNNxNNNN is the resolution that the monitor recommended.  That is what 
will be used unless you turn that feature off.

When such a driver is started in 'headless' mode, it will always assume 
VGA (800x600) because that is the minimum allowed resolution for 
standard VGA (all PC type monitors are supposed to be VGA compatible).

If you specify:

HorizSync 15.0 - 150.0
VertRefresh 48.0 - 190.0
ModeLine "1920x1080i" 82.620 1920 2089 2153 2448 1080 1100 1105 1125 
+Hsync +Vsync interlace

in your xorg.conf, the EDID will not be used.

Figuring out what those values need to be is a topic in itself.

[Frode Petersen]

Phil Meyer skrev:
> If you specify:
>
> HorizSync 15.0 - 150.0
> VertRefresh 48.0 - 190.0
> ModeLine "1920x1080i" 82.620 1920 2089 2153 2448 1080 1100 1105 1125 
> +Hsync +Vsync interlace
>
> in your xorg.conf, the EDID will not be used.
>
> Figuring out what those values need to be is a topic in itself.

Is the procedure the same as "in the old days" or has it too changed? I 
think I did that years ago, and info shouldn't be to hard to find.

Frode

[Styma, Robert E (Robert)]

> Is the procedure the same as "in the old days" or has it too 
> changed? I 
> think I did that years ago, and info shouldn't be to hard to find.

I hit this problem when I converted FC4->FC6.  There was no
place to add the "Module vnc" directive.
Since it was the same physical machine, I figured it would look
close to the Modules section from the FC4 machine.  
I walked through /var/log/Xorg.0.log and saw where it was loading
the modules and compared it to the list from the FC4 machine.
In my case it loaded one or two that were not in my FC4 list but
did get all the ones in the FC4 modules list.  I placed the
modules section from FC4 into the FC6 Xorg.conf file
and restarted the server. It worked.  Inspection of the new
Xorg.0.log showed the modules from before being added, plus
my VNC module.

I qualify this procedure by saying VNC to display the :0
display is less robust on FC6.  I don't know if this is
a function of VNC, FC6, or loading the modules the way I did.

Bob Styma