Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
xorg and dosbox
7 views
Skip to first unread message
patrick
Dec 23, 2011, 8:56:49 PM12/23/11
to
A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to go into full mode,
it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
Thought the below command would push everything into full mode.
xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
then.
Anyone familiar with this one ?
THX.
FF
it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
Thought the below command would push everything into full mode.
xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
then.
Anyone familiar with this one ?
THX.
FF
Foster
Dec 23, 2011, 9:18:20 PM12/23/11
to
However in this group you won't find many who will admit it.
For these Linux "advocates" Linux has, does and always will "just
work".
IOW they are liars.
RonB
Dec 23, 2011, 10:59:54 PM12/23/11
to
Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google mining
again, perhaps?)
http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php?topic=100690.0
At any rate, I use DOSBox and found that the key was making DOSBox match
Xorg, not vice versa. Just 'man dosbox' to find out how to adjust your
dosbox-xxx-config file.
You can also go to http://www.dosbox.com/ and ask questions there. This is
really not a Linux or Xorg issue, it's DOSBox application issue.
Thank you.
--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.7 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0
or Linux Mint 10
Homer
Dec 24, 2011, 12:39:07 AM12/24/11
to
Verily I say unto thee that RonB spake thusly:
/advocacy/ newsgroup.
Flatty needs to get a new routine.
--
K. | "UNIX is basically a simple operating
http://slated.org | system, but you have to be a genius
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on šky | to understand the simplicity"
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 214 days | ~ Dennis Ritchie
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:56:49 +0000, patrick wrote:
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>
>> THX.
>>
>> FF
>
> Hi "Patrick,"
>
> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google
> mining again, perhaps?)
Oh course. The big clue is a "Linux user" posting a /help/ message in an
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>
>> THX.
>>
>> FF
>
> Hi "Patrick,"
>
> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google
> mining again, perhaps?)
/advocacy/ newsgroup.
Flatty needs to get a new routine.
--
K. | "UNIX is basically a simple operating
http://slated.org | system, but you have to be a genius
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on šky | to understand the simplicity"
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 214 days | ~ Dennis Ritchie
William Poaster
Dec 24, 2011, 2:56:21 AM12/24/11
to
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 05:39:07 +0000, Homer wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee that RonB spake thusly:
>> On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:56:49 +0000, patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>>
>>> THX.
>>>
>>> FF
>>
>> Hi "Patrick,"
>>
>> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google
>> mining again, perhaps?)
>
> Oh course. The big clue is a "Linux user" posting a /help/ message in an
> /advocacy/ newsgroup.
>
> Flatty needs to get a new routine.
Yeah, same old, same old.
> Verily I say unto thee that RonB spake thusly:
>> On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:56:49 +0000, patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>>
>>> THX.
>>>
>>> FF
>>
>> Hi "Patrick,"
>>
>> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google
>> mining again, perhaps?)
>
> Oh course. The big clue is a "Linux user" posting a /help/ message in an
> /advocacy/ newsgroup.
>
> Flatty needs to get a new routine.
The troll's got no imagination.
--
Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over & over again,
expecting different results.
By that definition, the Mac & wintrolls repeating the same ol' FUD
over & over, means that their sanity is being brought into question.
Chris Ahlstrom
Dec 24, 2011, 8:32:55 AM12/24/11
to
RonB wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:56:49 +0000, patrick wrote:
>
>> A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to go into full mode,
>> it's always stuck in full aspect mode. Thought the below command would
>> push everything into full mode.
>>
>> xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
>>
>> Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
>> getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
>> then.
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>
>> THX.
>>
>> FF
>
> Hi "Patrick,"
>
> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google mining
> again, perhaps?)
>
> http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php?topic=100690.0
Busted!
> At any rate, I use DOSBox and found that the key was making DOSBox match
> Xorg, not vice versa. Just 'man dosbox' to find out how to adjust your
> dosbox-xxx-config file.
>
> You can also go to http://www.dosbox.com/ and ask questions there. This is
> really not a Linux or Xorg issue, it's DOSBox application issue.
See, "patrick", how to get help properly?
Another liar and bullshitter:
--
I can assue you I know a hell of a lot more about architectures and
project manager than someone who claims to pick his target OS AFTER it
has been built. You're a liar and bullshitter.
-- "Hadron" <ikopq2$hj8$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:56:49 +0000, patrick wrote:
>
>> A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to go into full mode,
>> it's always stuck in full aspect mode. Thought the below command would
>> push everything into full mode.
>>
>> xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
>>
>> Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
>> getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
>> then.
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>>
>> THX.
>>
>> FF
>
> Hi "Patrick,"
>
> Why are you signing your name "FF" as in "Ferdes Fides?" (Google mining
> again, perhaps?)
>
> http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php?topic=100690.0
> At any rate, I use DOSBox and found that the key was making DOSBox match
> Xorg, not vice versa. Just 'man dosbox' to find out how to adjust your
> dosbox-xxx-config file.
>
> You can also go to http://www.dosbox.com/ and ask questions there. This is
> really not a Linux or Xorg issue, it's DOSBox application issue.
Another liar and bullshitter:
--
I can assue you I know a hell of a lot more about architectures and
project manager than someone who claims to pick his target OS AFTER it
has been built. You're a liar and bullshitter.
-- "Hadron" <ikopq2$hj8$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
patrick
Dec 27, 2011, 3:52:24 PM12/27/11
to
A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to
go into full mode, it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
Thought the below command would push everything into
full mode.
xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
then.
Anyone familiar with this one ?
THX.
patrick
go into full mode, it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
Thought the below command would push everything into
full mode.
xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
then.
Anyone familiar with this one ?
THX.
patrick
Dec 27, 2011, 4:12:08 PM12/27/11
to
there is, and on their website. Some default setting is different from
xorg 1.6.5 and xorg 1.10.x I just have no way to compare what happened.
Thought some genius on this group might have that.
Oh well.
thanks for the response.
patrick
7
Dec 27, 2011, 5:09:04 PM12/27/11
to
Chris Ahlstrom
Dec 27, 2011, 8:16:11 PM12/27/11
to
patrick wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
You already posted this, and it was outed as a blatant copied of a
question in a more appropriate venue.
--
Am I correct in stating that you didn't think to read the article?
This Reiser guy has all the character traits of Roy Schestowitz in my
opinion.
-- "Hadron", http://www.archivum.info/comp.os.linux.advocacy/2008-04/00154/Re-NEWS--Hans-Reiser-Found-GUILTY-of-first-degree-murder.-Open-Source-fallout-begins.html
question in a more appropriate venue.
--
Am I correct in stating that you didn't think to read the article?
This Reiser guy has all the character traits of Roy Schestowitz in my
opinion.
-- "Hadron", http://www.archivum.info/comp.os.linux.advocacy/2008-04/00154/Re-NEWS--Hans-Reiser-Found-GUILTY-of-first-degree-murder.-Open-Source-fallout-begins.html
Marti Van Lin
Dec 27, 2011, 9:02:31 PM12/27/11
to
On 28-12-11 02:16, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> patrick wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to
>> go into full mode, it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
>> Thought the below command would push everything into
>> full mode.
>>
>> xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
>>
>> Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
>> getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
>> then.
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>
> You already posted this, and it was outed as a blatant copied of a
> question in a more appropriate venue.
Here is my ~./Dosbox/dosbox-0.74.conf:
> patrick wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> A xorg upgrade has caused my dosbox to be unable to
>> go into full mode, it's always stuck in full aspect mode.
>> Thought the below command would push everything into
>> full mode.
>>
>> xrandr --output LVDS1 --set "scaling mode" Full
>>
>> Unfortunately the change that takes affect has no effect on the problem,
>> getting DosBox full in the screen, not full aspect. Still searching
>> then.
>>
>> Anyone familiar with this one ?
>
> You already posted this, and it was outed as a blatant copied of a
> question in a more appropriate venue.
fullscreen=true
fulldouble=false
fullresolution=1440x900
windowresolution=original
output=openglnb
autolock=true
sensitivity=100
waitonerror=true
priority=higher,normal
mapperfile=mapper-0.74.map
usescancodes=true
Works like a charm. The trick is that fullresolution must be equal to
the Xorg resolution.
Poor troll.
--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin, alias ML2MST
|_|_|0| https://linuxcounter.net/user/513040.html
|0|0|0| http://www.soundclick.com/martivanlin
patrick
Dec 28, 2011, 2:58:19 PM12/28/11
to
On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 22:09:04 +0000, 7 wrote:
> Use SystemRescueCD LiveCD - it has a dosbox that does full screen.
> http://www.livecdlist.com
THX. Did not know that.
> Use SystemRescueCD LiveCD - it has a dosbox that does full screen.
> http://www.livecdlist.com
patrick
Dec 28, 2011, 3:03:59 PM12/28/11
to
On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:02:31 +0100, Marti Van Lin wrote:
> Here is my ~./Dosbox/dosbox-0.74.conf:
>
> fullscreen=true fulldouble=false fullresolution=1440x900
> windowresolution=original output=openglnb autolock=true sensitivity=100
> waitonerror=true priority=higher,normal mapperfile=mapper-0.74.map
> usescancodes=true
>
> Works like a charm. The trick is that fullresolution must be equal to
> the Xorg resolution.
>
> Poor troll.
I see you're using output=openglnb
> Here is my ~./Dosbox/dosbox-0.74.conf:
>
> fullscreen=true fulldouble=false fullresolution=1440x900
> windowresolution=original output=openglnb autolock=true sensitivity=100
> waitonerror=true priority=higher,normal mapperfile=mapper-0.74.map
> usescancodes=true
>
> Works like a charm. The trick is that fullresolution must be equal to
> the Xorg resolution.
>
> Poor troll.
One thing I haven't tried but soon will.
thanks for the response.
patrick
Dec 28, 2011, 3:29:41 PM12/28/11
to
I still say xorg changed the intel default settings and they're
impossile to find for me. More geniusses please.
THX.
0 new messages