Bug 47706

Summary: Video IN XFee86 and startup Scrambly and gilitchy
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Phil <pblevin>
Component: XFree86Assignee: Mike A. Harris <mharris>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2001-07-06 15:58:22 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Description Phil 2001-07-06 15:58:19 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0)

Description of problem:
When i startx I get alot of scramble on the graphics and its hard to make 
anything out. I have a a Diamod multimedia Monster Fusion graphics card 
with 16M of ram.  It works great with rh Linux 7.0. When setup it probes 
for my video card driver it always pics voodoo3as the graphics card(this 
is also that case in Win98/2000 so i think it's just a generic voodoo3 
card). It uses the Voodoo3 drivers when i select Diamod Monster fusion. 
Anyway it really scambles the graphics. If i log in text based it works 
grate.  I startx the graphics get scambled. I close the x windows system  
and the graphics are still scamble even when in the text prompt mode or 
just rebooting the computer. Anyway 7.0 works fine so i'm wondering if it 
has something to to do with the X server.  I saw severl bug reports 
similer to mine but not exactlly like it.

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1.log in

Actual Results:  get scrambled graphics

Expected Results:  X should start just like it should

Additional info:

It doesn't give any sort of error. It is just to scambly to see anything.

Comment 1 Phil 2001-07-10 13:50:49 UTC
The video card is actully a monster fusion(voodoo) not quit shure what i was thinking.  
Anyway that would make this a duplicate of bug 39148 cause he had the same problem.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39148 ***