[MPlayer-users] Re: RH8: Can't Use VESA, Even As Root

[xi]

Dan8827 wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
> Thanks to those who have contributed ideas so far.  I haven't fixed this
> yet, but I might have learned more about the problem.  I've done some
> experimenting, and some reading on this list and Google.  Also, I booted
> into Redhat 7.0, ran the same file (successfully) , and compared the
> messages to those on Redhat 8.0.  Here's what I've learned:
> 
> 1. The "VO: Comment: Requires ROOT privileges" is apparently for
> information only, not an indication that it failed to obtain root
> privileges.  I get the same message on Redhat 7.0 when VESA is
> successful.
> 
> 2. I gave fbdev a try, but without success.  I believe that's not
> supported in Redhat, and I'm not looking to build my own kernel just
> yet.  I could be wrong here - I'll admit I haven't R'd the FM when it
> comes to fbdev.
> 
> 3. Switching to gentoo apparently won't help, as there was a post today
> from a gentoo user with the same difficulty.  :)
> 
> Here's a portion of the output from mplayer under Redhat:
> 
> -------
> VO Config (640x360->640x360,flags=1,'MPlayer',0x32315659)
> VO: [vesa] 640x360 => 640x360 Planar YV12  [fs]
> VO: Description: VESA VBE 2.0 video output
> VO: Author: Nick Kurshev <nickols_k at mail.ru>
> VO: Comment: Requires ROOT privileges
> [?25lvo_vesa: Found VESA VBE BIOS Version 2.0 Revision: 100
> vo_vesa: Video memory: 32768 Kb
> vo_vesa: VESA Capabilities: 8-bit DAC, VGA CRTC, normal RAMDAC, no
> stereoscopic, no stereo
> vo_vesa: !!! Below will be printed OEM info. !!!
> vo_vesa: You should watch 5 OEM related lines below else you've broken
> vm86
> vo_vesa: OEM info: ATI RAGE128
> vo_vesa: OEM Revision: 100
> vo_vesa: OEM vendor: ATI Technologies Inc.
> vo_vesa: OEM Product Name: R128
> vo_vesa: OEM Product Rev: 01.00
> vo_vesa: Hint: To get workable TV-Out you should have plugged
> tv-connector in
> vo_vesa: before booting PC since VESA BIOS initializes itself only
> during POST
> vo_vesa: Requested mode: 640x360 at 16 (Planar YV12)
> vo_vesa: Total modes found: 56
> ------
> 
> On Redhat 8, the message immediately after "VO: Comment: Requires ROOT
> privileges" was "Killed", at which point mplayer stops.
> 
> As seen above, Redhat 7.0 continues with the following message:
> "vo_vesa: Found VESA VBE BIOS Version 2.0 Revision: 100"  
> 
> ...so I'd presume the problem is somehow related to the VESA BIOS.  Any
> thoughts on what might cause Redhat 8 to stumble at this point?  It's
> the same video card between 7.0 and 8.0.  Also, X appears to be
> accessing the VBE BIOS under 8.0 without a problem; here's a bit from
> /var/log/XFree86.0.log:
> 
> (II) Loading sub module "vbe"
> (II) LoadModule: "vbe"
> (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libvbe.a
> (II) Module vbe: vendor="The XFree86 Project"
> 	compiled for 4.2.0, module version = 1.0.0
> 	ABI class: XFree86 Video Driver, version 0.5
> (II) R128(0): VESA BIOS detected
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE Version 2.0
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE Total Mem: 32768 kB
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE OEM: ATI RAGE128
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE OEM Software Rev: 1.0
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE OEM Vendor: ATI Technologies Inc.
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE OEM Product: R128
> (II) R128(0): VESA VBE OEM Product Rev: 01.00
> 
> Any advice on what the check next?
> 
> Thanks again.
> 


Hi,

I already posted this in a previous thread, but I repost here:

I use a mandrake, and since mdk9, I can't use anymore VESA output. I 
found the problem comes from the glibc: mdk8.2 used glibc-2.2.4, and 
mdk9 uses glibc-2.2.5.
The test is simple:
    mdk9 + glibc-2.2.5 => segfault
    mdk9 + glibc-2.2.4 => it works

I don't know if it can help, but as far as I know redhat also changed 
glibc version between 7.0 and 8.0.

Someone else also suggested there is a bug with ext3 filesystem. Quoting 
Nick Kurshev:
"If you have EXT3FS then try recompile mplayer without win32 support.
Win32loader uses threads but it's known that 
ext3fs+syscall_vm86+/dev/mem+threads=segfault
or use ext2fs instead!"
but for me it works in certain conditions!

Regards,
			Xavier