Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #161385 > unrolled thread

Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 01:10 +0100
    Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Mike Kupfer <m.kupfer@acm.org> - 2015-12-01 01:50 +0100
      Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 02:20 +0100
        Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 02:30 +0100
          Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 08:20 +0100
            Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-01 08:40 +0100
              Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 09:40 +0100
              Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 10:10 +0100
            Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Sven Arvidsson <sa@whiz.se> - 2015-12-01 16:10 +0100
              Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
                Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-01 17:30 +0100
                  Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-01 18:00 +0100
                    Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-01 18:10 +0100
                      Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Sven Arvidsson <sa@whiz.se> - 2015-12-01 18:20 +0100
                        Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-01 22:40 +0100
                          Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Sven Arvidsson <sa@whiz.se> - 2015-12-01 23:10 +0100
                            Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-02 02:50 +0100
                            (SOLVED) Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except  1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 06:10 +0100
                            Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 11:30 +0100
                  Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-12-02 20:40 +0100
        Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Mike Kupfer <m.kupfer@acm.org> - 2015-12-01 02:30 +0100
          Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Mike Kupfer <m.kupfer@acm.org> - 2015-12-01 02:40 +0100
        Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-12-01 13:20 +0100
          Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768 Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2015-12-01 16:10 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#161385 — Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768

On 11/30/2015 04:01 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> Marc Shapiro wrote:
>
>> My problem now is screen resolution.  All I get is 1024x768.  Under
>> Wheezy I get 15 different resolutions from 720x400 and 640x480 up to
>> 1920x1080.  Jessie says that the monitor is "Unknown" and only allows
>> me to use 1024x768.  How do I get X to recognize my monitor under
>> Jessie?
> Here are a couple troubleshooting steps that I would try:
>
> - Check for a legacy configuration file (e.g., /etc/X11/xorg.conf).  If
>    one is present, try moving it out of the way and restarting X.
Does not exist.  That was the first thing I looked for.
> - Boot a Live image and see what resolution it gives you.
I can still boot into Wheezy and get 1920x1080.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#161389

Marc Shapiro wrote:

> On 11/30/2015 04:01 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> > - Boot a Live image and see what resolution it gives you.
> I can still boot into Wheezy and get 1920x1080.

I meant a Jessie Live image.

Though given that you didn't find an old xorg.conf file, the odds of the
Live image doing something different seem pretty slim.

I agree with Felix's recommendation to post information about the
graphics card and at least the Jessie X log file (having both the Jessie
and Wheezy log files would be better).

regards,
mike

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161390

On 11/30/2015 04:45 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> Marc Shapiro wrote:
>
>> On 11/30/2015 04:01 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
>>> - Boot a Live image and see what resolution it gives you.
>> I can still boot into Wheezy and get 1920x1080.
> I meant a Jessie Live image.
>
> Though given that you didn't find an old xorg.conf file, the odds of the
> Live image doing something different seem pretty slim.
>
> I agree with Felix's recommendation to post information about the
> graphics card and at least the Jessie X log file (having both the Jessie
> and Wheezy log files would be better).
>
> regards,
> mike
I have a copy of Xorg.0.log for both Wheezy and Jessie.  How do I post 
them to paste.debian.net?

Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161391

On Tuesday 01 December 2015 01:10:33 Marc Shapiro wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 04:45 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> > Marc Shapiro wrote:
> >> On 11/30/2015 04:01 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> >>> - Boot a Live image and see what resolution it gives you.
> >>
> >> I can still boot into Wheezy and get 1920x1080.
> >
> > I meant a Jessie Live image.
> >
> > Though given that you didn't find an old xorg.conf file, the odds of the
> > Live image doing something different seem pretty slim.
> >
> > I agree with Felix's recommendation to post information about the
> > graphics card and at least the Jessie X log file (having both the Jessie
> > and Wheezy log files would be better).
> >
> > regards,
> > mike
>
> I have a copy of Xorg.0.log for both Wheezy and Jessie.  How do I post
> them to paste.debian.net?
>
> Marc

Just send them here so that all of us and the archives can see them.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161402

On 11/30/2015 05:27 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 05:24 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>> On Tuesday 01 December 2015 01:10:33 Marc Shapiro wrote:
>>> On 11/30/2015 04:45 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
>>>> Marc Shapiro wrote:
>>>>> On 11/30/2015 04:01 PM, Mike Kupfer wrote:
>>>>>> - Boot a Live image and see what resolution it gives you.
>>>>> I can still boot into Wheezy and get 1920x1080.
>>>> I meant a Jessie Live image.
>>>>
>>>> Though given that you didn't find an old xorg.conf file, the odds 
>>>> of the
>>>> Live image doing something different seem pretty slim.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Felix's recommendation to post information about the
>>>> graphics card and at least the Jessie X log file (having both the 
>>>> Jessie
>>>> and Wheezy log files would be better).
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> mike
>>> I have a copy of Xorg.0.log for both Wheezy and Jessie.  How do I post
>>> them to paste.debian.net?
>>>
>>> Marc
>> Just send them here so that all of us and the archives can see them.
>>
>> Lisi
>>
> OK.  Here they are.  I hope someone can make better sense of them than 
> I can.  Log files are not my friend.
>
> Marc
Alright.  Knowing nothing about the inner workings of X, I can at least 
look through the two log files (in my previous post) and see where they 
suddenly go in very different directions.

Using the numbers down the left-hand side of the logs (I don't know what 
they actually are, but they seem to be ascending, so I will use them as 
markers), at 32.959 in the Wheezy log and at 2271.289 in the Jessie log 
they both say:

     (++) using VT number 7

a few lines below that, in the Wheezy log:


[    32.974] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[    32.974]    compiled for 1.12.4, module version = 0.0.2
[    32.974]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 12.1
[    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): TOTO SAYS 00000000fddc0000
[    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): MMIO registers at 0x00000000fddc0000: size 
128KB
[    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): PCI bus 1 card 0 func 0
[    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Creating default Display subsection in 
Screen section
         "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32
[    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
[    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Pixel depth = 24 bits stored in 4 bytes (32 
bpp pixmaps)
[    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Default visual is TrueColor

     SKIP

[    33.024] (II) RADEON(0): Detected total video RAM=1048576K, 
accessible=262144K (PCI BAR=262144K)

and in the Jessie log:

[  2271.291] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[  2271.291]    compiled for 1.16.4, module version = 0.0.2
[  2271.291]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 18.0
[  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(2): claimed PCI slot 1@0:0:0
[  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(2): using default device
[  2271.291] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for vesa
[  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
[  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "radeon"
[  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
[  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "modesetting"
[  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): Creating default Display subsection in 
Screen section
         "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 16/16
[  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Depth 16, (==) framebuffer bpp 16
[  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): RGB weight 565
[  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Default visual is TrueColor
[  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
[  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): hardware: simple (video memory: 1536kB)
[  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against framebuffer device...
[  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against monitor...
[  2271.291] (--) FBDEV(0): Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)
[  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(0):  Built-in mode "current"
[  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): DPI set to (96, 96)


In Wheezy, the graphics card seems to have been found and a depth of 
24bpp is being used by RADEON(0) with a GB of graphics memory, while in 
Jessie, Screen 0 is getting deleted and the radeon module is removed.  
Instead of RADEON(0) we see FBDEV(0), instead of 24bbp, only 16bbp is 
being used.  Only 1536kB of video memory is being used and the screen 
size is set to "Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)".

I don't know enough to determine what is causing these differences, let 
alone how to correct the problem.  If someone else can figure out a 
solution I would be most grateful.

Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161403

Marc Shapiro composed on 2015-11-30 23:11 (UTC-0800):

> Alright.  Knowing nothing about the inner workings of X, I can at least 
> look through the two log files (in my previous post) and see where they 
> suddenly go in very different directions.

> Using the numbers down the left-hand side of the logs (I don't know what 
> they actually are, but they seem to be ascending, so I will use them as 
> markers), at 32.959 in the Wheezy log and at 2271.289 in the Jessie log 
> they both say:

>      (++) using VT number 7

> a few lines below that, in the Wheezy log:

> [    32.974] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
> [    32.974]    compiled for 1.12.4, module version = 0.0.2
> [    32.974]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 12.1
> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): TOTO SAYS 00000000fddc0000
> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): MMIO registers at 0x00000000fddc0000: size  128KB
> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): PCI bus 1 card 0 func 0
> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
>          "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32
> [    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Pixel depth = 24 bits stored in 4 bytes (32 bpp pixmaps)
> [    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Default visual is TrueColor

>      SKIP

> [    33.024] (II) RADEON(0): Detected total video RAM=1048576K, accessible=262144K (PCI BAR=262144K)

> and in the Jessie log:

> [  2271.291] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
> [  2271.291]    compiled for 1.16.4, module version = 0.0.2
> [  2271.291]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 18.0
> [  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(2): claimed PCI slot 1@0:0:0
> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(2): using default device
> [  2271.291] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for vesa
> [  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
> [  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "radeon"
> [  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
> [  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "modesetting"
> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
>          "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 16/16
> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Depth 16, (==) framebuffer bpp 16
> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): RGB weight 565
> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Default visual is TrueColor
> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): hardware: simple (video memory: 1536kB)
> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against framebuffer device...
> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against monitor...
> [  2271.291] (--) FBDEV(0): Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)
> [  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(0):  Built-in mode "current"
> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): DPI set to (96, 96)

> In Wheezy, the graphics card seems to have been found and a depth of 
> 24bpp is being used by RADEON(0) with a GB of graphics memory, while in 
> Jessie, Screen 0 is getting deleted and the radeon module is removed.  
> Instead of RADEON(0) we see FBDEV(0), instead of 24bbp, only 16bbp is 
> being used.  Only 1536kB of video memory is being used and the screen 
> size is set to "Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)".

FBDEV doesn't ever support 1920x1080 AFAIK. Video RAM and bpp are non-issues
here. What needs to be determined is why RADEON is not being used in Jessie.
FBDEV is a grossly inferior fallback.

> I don't know enough to determine what is causing these differences, let 
> alone how to correct the problem.  If someone else can figure out a 
> solution I would be most grateful.

You haven't provided everything requested. We don't know which gfxcard you
have, which 'lspci | grep VGA' would report. Your excerpts from Xorg.0.logs
don't have other info that may be required to help, such as kernel cmdline,
which could be the reason why RADEON is not used. Another possibility is that
Jessie provides firmware your ATI gfxcard requires in a separate firmware
package that is not installed, or maybe the ATI driver package didn't get
installed at all. Read through
https://wiki.debian.org/AtiHowTo#Troubleshooting and you may not need any
more help from us.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161406

On 11/30/2015 11:32 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Marc Shapiro composed on 2015-11-30 23:11 (UTC-0800):
>
>> Alright.  Knowing nothing about the inner workings of X, I can at least
>> look through the two log files (in my previous post) and see where they
>> suddenly go in very different directions.
>> Using the numbers down the left-hand side of the logs (I don't know what
>> they actually are, but they seem to be ascending, so I will use them as
>> markers), at 32.959 in the Wheezy log and at 2271.289 in the Jessie log
>> they both say:
>>       (++) using VT number 7
>> a few lines below that, in the Wheezy log:
>> [    32.974] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
>> [    32.974]    compiled for 1.12.4, module version = 0.0.2
>> [    32.974]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 12.1
>> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): TOTO SAYS 00000000fddc0000
>> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): MMIO registers at 0x00000000fddc0000: size  128KB
>> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): PCI bus 1 card 0 func 0
>> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
>>           "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32
>> [    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
>> [    32.975] (II) RADEON(0): Pixel depth = 24 bits stored in 4 bytes (32 bpp pixmaps)
>> [    32.975] (==) RADEON(0): Default visual is TrueColor
>>       SKIP
>> [    33.024] (II) RADEON(0): Detected total video RAM=1048576K, accessible=262144K (PCI BAR=262144K)
>> and in the Jessie log:
>> [  2271.291] (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
>> [  2271.291]    compiled for 1.16.4, module version = 0.0.2
>> [  2271.291]    ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 18.0
>> [  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(2): claimed PCI slot 1@0:0:0
>> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(2): using default device
>> [  2271.291] (WW) Falling back to old probe method for vesa
>> [  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
>> [  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "radeon"
>> [  2271.291] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
>> [  2271.291] (II) UnloadModule: "modesetting"
>> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section
>>           "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 16/16
>> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Depth 16, (==) framebuffer bpp 16
>> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): RGB weight 565
>> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Default visual is TrueColor
>> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
>> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): hardware: simple (video memory: 1536kB)
>> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against framebuffer device...
>> [  2271.291] (II) FBDEV(0): checking modes against monitor...
>> [  2271.291] (--) FBDEV(0): Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)
>> [  2271.291] (**) FBDEV(0):  Built-in mode "current"
>> [  2271.291] (==) FBDEV(0): DPI set to (96, 96)
>> In Wheezy, the graphics card seems to have been found and a depth of
>> 24bpp is being used by RADEON(0) with a GB of graphics memory, while in
>> Jessie, Screen 0 is getting deleted and the radeon module is removed.
>> Instead of RADEON(0) we see FBDEV(0), instead of 24bbp, only 16bbp is
>> being used.  Only 1536kB of video memory is being used and the screen
>> size is set to "Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)".
> FBDEV doesn't ever support 1920x1080 AFAIK. Video RAM and bpp are non-issues
> here. What needs to be determined is why RADEON is not being used in Jessie.
> FBDEV is a grossly inferior fallback.
>
>> I don't know enough to determine what is causing these differences, let
>> alone how to correct the problem.  If someone else can figure out a
>> solution I would be most grateful.
> You haven't provided everything requested. We don't know which gfxcard you
> have, which 'lspci | grep VGA' would report. Your excerpts from Xorg.0.logs
> don't have other info that may be required to help, such as kernel cmdline,
> which could be the reason why RADEON is not used. Another possibility is that
> Jessie provides firmware your ATI gfxcard requires in a separate firmware
> package that is not installed, or maybe the ATI driver package didn't get
> installed at all. Read through
> https://wiki.debian.org/AtiHowTo#Troubleshooting and you may not need any
> more help from us.

Here is the lspci output showing the graphics card:

$ lspci | grep VGA
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI 
Cedar PRO [Radeon HD 5450/6350]

My post prior to the one you quoted above has the entire contents of 
both logs.  After posting them, I saw where the logs diverged so 
radically and made another post with just the excerpts.

Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161408

Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> writes:

> Another possibility is that Jessie provides firmware your ATI gfxcard
> requires in a separate firmware package that is not installed, or
> maybe the ATI driver package didn't get installed at all.

I manage a bunch of workstations with exactly this issue. I had to
install firmware-linux-nonfree to get X to recognise the Radeon cards in
these machines. Since firmware-linux-nonfree pulls in
firmware-amd-graphics, I suspect installing the latter will be
sufficient for OP.

Mart

-- 
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
    --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161421

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, 2015-11-30 at 23:11 -0800, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> In Wheezy, the graphics card seems to have been found and a depth of 
> 24bpp is being used by RADEON(0) with a GB of graphics memory, while
> in 
> Jessie, Screen 0 is getting deleted and the radeon module is removed.
>   
> Instead of RADEON(0) we see FBDEV(0), instead of 24bbp, only 16bbp is
> being used.  Only 1536kB of video memory is being used and the screen
> size is set to "Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)".
> 
> I don't know enough to determine what is causing these differences,
> let 
> alone how to correct the problem.  If someone else can figure out a 
> solution I would be most grateful.

Most likely missing firmware as others have suggested, check dmesg and
grep for radeon and/or drm. 

-- 
Cheers,
Sven Arvidsson
http://www.whiz.se
PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161422

On 12/01/2015 07:03 AM, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-11-30 at 23:11 -0800, Marc Shapiro wrote:
>> In Wheezy, the graphics card seems to have been found and a depth of
>> 24bpp is being used by RADEON(0) with a GB of graphics memory, while
>> in
>> Jessie, Screen 0 is getting deleted and the radeon module is removed.
>>    
>> Instead of RADEON(0) we see FBDEV(0), instead of 24bbp, only 16bbp is
>> being used.  Only 1536kB of video memory is being used and the screen
>> size is set to "Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024)".
>>
>> I don't know enough to determine what is causing these differences,
>> let
>> alone how to correct the problem.  If someone else can figure out a
>> solution I would be most grateful.
> Most likely missing firmware as others have suggested, check dmesg and
> grep for radeon and/or drm.
>
I will install  firmware-amd-graphics as soon as I get a chance 
(probably this evening) and report back.  Meanwhile, Felix says that he 
never received my post with the full logs and others seem not to have 
received them, either, by what they have posted.  For the sake of 
keeping all of the information available for the future, I will post 
them at that time, as well.  Should they be sent as attachments, or 
inline.  I sent them as attachments last time. Could that have been the 
problem?

Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161424

Marc Shapiro composed on 2015-12-01 07:15 (UTC-0800):

> I will install  firmware-amd-graphics as soon as I get a chance 

firmware-linux-nonfree is what worked on Jessie for my Cedar and for Mart.

> (probably this evening) and report back.  Meanwhile, Felix says that he 
> never received my post with the full logs and others seem not to have 

Looks like it never reached
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/12/threads.html either, possibly
due to excessive size, or maybe pasting as attachment rather than inline.

> received them, either, by what they have posted.  For the sake of 
> keeping all of the information available for the future, I will post 

Some people think "all information" should be saved for the future. Others
don't. It's your choice. Be aware that "all information" in the case of Xorg
logs and dmesg is voluminous, and like other mailing list info, stays on the
Internet forever. As some small portion of Xorg.0.log is arguably personal,
one may not wish it to be available forever. Those concerned with noise in
archive searches also may prefer the linking method of log sharing. Little in
those logs is actually relevant to solution, and often, what is is relevant
only to the OP.

Chris Bannister's opinion how to share voluminous data is not universal. On
some other mailing lists, inclusion is explicitly frowned upon. There are no
published/official rules here (of which I'm aware, and I did look) that say
one must or must not pollute list archives with voluminous logs.
http://paste.debian.net/ and other pastebins exist for good reason. Ephemeral
need is precisely one of them. Reducing loss of privacy is another.

> them at that time, as well.  Should they be sent as attachments, or 
> inline.  I sent them as attachments last time. Could that have been the 
> problem?

At this point, what's the point? Solution has almost certainly been
determined to be missing firmware. Xorg.0.log and dmesg won't explain why
firmware was installed in Wheezy but wasn't installed in Jessie. If your
trouble continues after installing firmware, previous logs are unlikely to be
helpful to resolution.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161426

Felix Miata composed on 2015-12-01 11:25 (UTC-0500):

> Marc Shapiro composed on 2015-12-01 07:15 (UTC-0800):

>> I will install  firmware-amd-graphics as soon as I get a chance 

> firmware-linux-nonfree is what worked on Jessie for my Cedar and for Mart.

Oops. Retract. I failed conscious notice of firmware-amd-graphics in Mart's post.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161427

Felix Miata composed on 2015-12-01 11:50 (UTC-0500):

> Felix Miata composed on 2015-12-01 11:25 (UTC-0500):

>> Marc Shapiro composed on 2015-12-01 07:15 (UTC-0800):

>>> I will install  firmware-amd-graphics as soon as I get a chance 

>> firmware-linux-nonfree is what worked on Jessie for my Cedar and for Mart.

> Oops. Retract. I failed conscious notice of firmware-amd-graphics in Mart's post.

Hmmm. My Cedar is working in Jessie, and there is no firmware-amd-graphics
installed. Neither do aptitude search firmware-amd-graphics or aptitude
search amd-graph return anything. firmware-linux-nonfree however is installed.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161428

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 12:01 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> Hmmm. My Cedar is working in Jessie, and there is no firmware-amd
> -graphics
> installed. Neither do aptitude search firmware-amd-graphics or
> aptitude
> search amd-graph return anything. firmware-linux-nonfree however is
> installed.

The AMD firmware used to be in firmware-linux-nonfree. Now that is a
metapackage that depends on firmware-amd-graphics and a few others.

-- 
Cheers,
Sven Arvidsson
http://www.whiz.se
PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161439

Sven Arvidsson composed on 2015-12-01 18:15 (UTC+0100):

> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 12:01 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:

>> Hmmm. My Cedar is working in Jessie, and there is no firmware-amd-graphics
>> installed. Neither do aptitude search firmware-amd-graphics or aptitude
>> search amd-graph return anything. firmware-linux-nonfree however is
>> installed.

> The AMD firmware used to be in firmware-linux-nonfree. Now that is a
> metapackage that depends on firmware-amd-graphics and a few others.

"Now", as in Stretch and/or Sid? I searched in Jessie and failed to discover
any available firmware-amd-graphics. Is another repo besides main and updates
required? I booted same machine to Stretch, and neither package was found.
And, Stretch is also using FBDEV, like OP here, and stuck in 1280x1024 on a
1680x1050 display, with libdrm-radeon1, xserver-xorg-video-ati and
xserver-xorg-video-radeon installed. ???

http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/Xorg/xorg.0.log-big41-stretch-fbdev
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161440

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 16:39 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> "Now", as in Stretch and/or Sid? I searched in Jessie and failed to
> discover
> any available firmware-amd-graphics. Is another repo besides main and
> updates
> required? I booted same machine to Stretch, and neither package was
> found.
> And, Stretch is also using FBDEV, like OP here, and stuck in
> 1280x1024 on a
> 1680x1050 display, with libdrm-radeon1, xserver-xorg-video-ati and
> xserver-xorg-video-radeon installed. ???
> 

Sid and/or stretch, I don't recall exactly when the split was made.

The clue is in the name, nonfree ;)

-- 
Cheers,
Sven Arvidsson
http://www.whiz.se
PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161444

Sven Arvidsson composed on 2015-12-01 23:05 (UTC+0100):

> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 16:39 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:

>> "Now", as in Stretch and/or Sid? I searched in Jessie and failed to discover
>> any available firmware-amd-graphics. Is another repo besides main and updates
>> required? I booted same machine to Stretch, and neither package was found.
>> And, Stretch is also using FBDEV, like OP here, and stuck in 1280x1024 on a
>> 1680x1050 display, with libdrm-radeon1, xserver-xorg-video-ati and
>> xserver-xorg-video-radeon installed. ???

> Sid and/or stretch, I don't recall exactly when the split was made.

> The clue is in the name, nonfree ;)

Helps to have non-free included in apt sources before searching for nonfree
packages. :-p I wonder if this omission accounts for OP?
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161448 — (SOLVED) Re: Upgrade to Jessie lost all monitor resolutions except 1024x768

On 12/01/2015 02:05 PM, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 16:39 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
>> "Now", as in Stretch and/or Sid? I searched in Jessie and failed to
>> discover
>> any available firmware-amd-graphics. Is another repo besides main and
>> updates
>> required? I booted same machine to Stretch, and neither package was
>> found.
>> And, Stretch is also using FBDEV, like OP here, and stuck in
>> 1280x1024 on a
>> 1680x1050 display, with libdrm-radeon1, xserver-xorg-video-ati and
>> xserver-xorg-video-radeon installed. ???
>>
> Sid and/or stretch, I don't recall exactly when the split was made.
>
> The clue is in the name, nonfree ;)
>
The correct package in Jessie is firmware-linux-nonfree.  It apparently 
no longer pulls in anything else and has all the drivers, itself.  There 
is no firmware-amd-graphics in Jessie.  Yes.  Having nonfree in your 
sources list does help, but I do keep it there. Installing 
firmware-linux-nonfree and rebooting was the answer.

Thank you to everybody that helped on this.  Since this is solved and 
the answer wasn't found in the logs, I will pass on sending a really 
long post by including the logs.

Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161452

Sven Arvidsson <sa@whiz.se> writes:

> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 16:39 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
>> "Now", as in Stretch and/or Sid? I searched in Jessie and failed to
>> discover
>> any available firmware-amd-graphics. Is another repo besides main and
>> updates
>> required? I booted same machine to Stretch, and neither package was
>> found.
>> And, Stretch is also using FBDEV, like OP here, and stuck in
>> 1280x1024 on a
>> 1680x1050 display, with libdrm-radeon1, xserver-xorg-video-ati and
>> xserver-xorg-video-radeon installed. ???
>> 
>
> Sid and/or stretch, I don't recall exactly when the split was made.
>
> The clue is in the name, nonfree ;)

Ah yes. I knew I fixed it by installing firmware-linux-nonfree, as I
knew that pulled in the radeon firmware; I was unaware that it was split
in sid, and since I run sid on this laptop, I assumed that the split
that I found dated back to Jessie.

And you know what they say about assuming things... ;)

Mart

-- 
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
    --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161471

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:25:16AM -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> 
> Some people think "all information" should be saved for the future. Others
> don't. It's your choice. Be aware that "all information" in the case of Xorg
> logs and dmesg is voluminous, and like other mailing list info, stays on the
> Internet forever. As some small portion of Xorg.0.log is arguably personal,
> one may not wish it to be available forever. 

I'm intrigued, what personal/private information is in the Xorg log?

-- 
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing." --- Malcolm X

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web