On Tuesday 24 February 2004 05:14 pm, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 13:04, Dennis Veatch wrote: > > On Tuesday 24 February 2004 01:27 pm, jayjwa wrote: > > > On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Dennis Veatch wrote: > > > > Version XFree86-4.4-0 > > How can you be running 4.4-0? The latest beta is 4.3.99.903. Fumble fingers on my part, rounding numbers:) Cooker is at XFree86-4.3-27 right now anyway. > > > > > I'm seeing a number of these kernel errors; > > > > > > > > > > > > Feb 14 18:58:42 sidney kernel: atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It > > > > shouldn't access hardware directly. > > > > Feb 14 19:00:58 sidney kernel: atkbd.c: Unknown key released > > > > (translated set 2, code 0x7a on isa0060/serio0). > > > > Feb 14 19:00:58 sidney kernel: atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It > > > > shouldn't access hardware directly. > > > > Feb 14 19:00:58 sidney kernel: atkbd.c: Unknown key released > > > > (translated set 2, code 0x7a on isa0060/serio0). > > > > Feb 14 19:00:58 sidney kernel: atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It > > > > shouldn't > > > > > > What is a "sideny kernel"? AFAIK, XFree86 is made to do just that. > > > > That's just the way Mandrake shoves the errors in the log file. Sidney is > > the host name. > > That's how Debian does it, too. Oh, now that you mention it. Those errors are from /var/log/kernel/errors, hend "sidney kernel". > > > If it's made to do that then why is it called an xfree bug? > > Maybe you don't have DRI configured? But then, DRI is disabled > in 4.4, isn't it? Wasn't really to worried about the DRI thing. Just the bit about shouldn't access hardware directly. -- Registered Linux user 193414 http://counter.li.org "Trying"? My contribution was much closer to a "feeble wave in the general direction of something that might lead you one step closer to a solution if you squint really hard and do all of the work." _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
