[ fbsd_x11 ] replacing the present intel(4x) driver with a newer one

[spellberg_robert]

dear sir ---

i thank you for your reply.
i confess that your response leaves me confused.



am i to understand that "features" have been removed from the kernel ?

during the past three weeks,
   as i have been migrating from fbsd_4.11 to fbsd_6.4 [ i never trusted the fives ],
   i have noted the differences between x11r6_4.4 and xorg_7.3.
using a ati rage_128 agp_card [ r128(4x) ], i got 1920 x 1200 @ 60 with 24_bit color
   [ the ati had 32_M of memory on
       an asus mo_bo with a pentium_3 and 256_M memory running fbsd_4.11
   ].
only this morning, due to an unrelated problem, i had a w98se hd in that same box;
   it produces 1920 x 1200 @ 60 using 24_bit.
further, i can make the desktop 1920 x 1440 [ hmmm ... , 4x3, go figure ].
given the relationship between intel and lose_dows,
   i can't imagine an intel chip_set on an intel mo_bo not being able to perform this task.
isn't this a "solved problem", like 100_megabit lan_speed ?



ok.
let me take this information at face value;
   that something about the f_6.4 kernel, on an intel chip_set [ g41 / g31 ],
   with an "intel" driver [ is this an xorg internal project ? ],
   can't do something --elementary--.
what about those "vesa" drivers ?
the one i am using supports 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 [ @ 60_f, 24_b ].
i know; i have tried them all.
the "xorg.log" file suggests that it has heard of 1920x1200, although i can not get it to do this.
it seems that it can only do its "built_in" modes.
does anyone know if later versions of this driver have such a mode "built_in" ?



i am dreading having to re_arrange my schedule,
   in order to download tarballs so that
   i can try this myself, one after another,
   until i find success or throw up my hands in disgust.
my killer_app depends on having a large terminal interface.
it is important to use inexpensive, but, none_the_less, name_brand, hardware.
perhaps, i will have to select a different chip_set.
i may have to build a fbsd_7.3 test_box,
   even though i am not ready, yet, to commit to the sevens.
in the mean_while ....



have you any further thoughts ?
are there any thoughts from others on this list ?

again, tia [ please cc ].

rob



ps ---

i almost forgot; sorry.
at my age, waiting ten years is not an option.
i appreciate your confidence, however.



Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:47 AM, spellberg_robert
> <emailrob at emailrob.com> wrote:
> 
>>greetings all ---
>>
>>the point of this inquiry is to learn if
>> i am on the right track in my thinking,
>> before i start doing a lot of work.

     [ big_snip ]

>>question :
>>
>>       if i download, extract, read the "readme", verify that it supports the chipset,
>>         et cetera, et cetera, et cetera [ in the usual way ];
>> >-->  if i cause a newer driver to be found by
>> >-->    the x 7.3 on fbsd 6.4 or
>> >-->    the x 7.4 on fbsd 7.3;
>>       am i likely to have success in being able to use the newer driver
>>         [ because it recognizes the chipset ],
>>         perhaps, getting the 320 pixels that i desire and,
>>         perhaps, getting a bunch o' extra_features
>>         [ of which i am presently un_aware ] ?
>>
>>   or
>>
>>       is this version of x so "tightly wound" that
>>         i would have to change way_too_many_things to get this idea to work,
>>         reducing this to be too much effort for the result ?



> I don't really know what driver version will work for you but newest
> intel drivers(newer than in ports) are not supported at all because of
> missing features in FreeBSD kernel. It is possible (not easy) to
> backport new version of driver to current kernel state.
> 
> IMHO current Xorg is one big mess, wait another 10 years until it grows up.