[sf-lug] problems with refresh rate under Intrepid

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Tue Mar 17 19:26:16 PDT 2009

Quoting Christian Einfeldt (einfeldt at gmail.com):

> > Suggestion:  Figure out what this _really_ did.  Post details.
> Please see below.

OK, I skim-read all 112 lines.

I looked in vain for a recounting of what specific change occurred 
in your system configuration files, when you used the still-unidentified
tools to fetch unspecified packages and make unspecified changes.

You basically ignored -- and more than likely didn't follow -- my point.

For the sake of collective knowledge, here's a different tack to
approach the same topic.  Imagine that I wanted to either duplicate 
or fully understand what you did.  Your account started out with using
some GNOME menu operation to "enable [sic] the ATI FGLRX driver" --
which in plain English means, first, you ran process
/usr/bin/gnome-device-manager.  If you'd bothered to look at the process
table, you'd have known that, but of course you didn't.

You checked some checkbox in the gnome-device-manager UI that, in turn,
caused it to add lines in /etc/apt/sources.list for the "restricted" 
repositories, fetch those repositories' package indexes, and fetched
packages linux-restricted-modules and restricted-manager, then installed
that package.  

gnome-device-manager then spawned restricted-manager, which very likely
fetched _some_ tarball (or not a .deb, in any event) of the FGLRX
binary-only X11 and kernel drivers, probably from somewhere within
http://ati.amd.com/, which it probably landed to temp files in /tmp, and
then ran the ATI installer while suppressing its output.  That installer
made changes to your kernel's runtime module set, and possibly -- or
maybe not -- made some tweaks to your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file.  (There's
an outside chance that those changes went to your /etc/event.d/ tree,
instead, since I believe Ubuntu's among those distros trying to get rid
of xorg.conf, but on balance I doubt it.)

Those xorg.conf changes are what are most important, but you said
nothing about them at all, and instead quoted a bit over 100 lines of
missing the point completely and pasting stuff that's not relevant
to my suggestion.

(At this point, no, I really don't need you to post your xorg.conf.)

More information about the sf-lug mailing list