[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ubuntu bulletproof x



On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 14:54 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> In either case, asking for the windows CD won't tell you what you want
> to know.  It will tell you sync ranges, when what you _want_ to know is
> desired resolution and display type (as in, CRT, LCD, beamer, whatever).
> Afterwards you can validate that against the sync ranges from the INF
> file if you want, but really, either it'll work or it won't, and asking
> for the CD won't make it work better.

As someone who's done some work in the embedded space, I can see how
it's possible that the device might return wrong information which is
superseded by information found in driver updates. Firmware can't always
be updated, so if the hardware does return with some error or new
information is deemed important or necessary, that's usually done
through some file update.

What's the objective here? To come up with working ModeLines for the
video card and video display combination? Don't Windows INF files
contain additional information useful for coming up with those ModeLines
that isn't available from the hardware (EDID)? How does Windows
determine the valid resolutions for the same piece of hardware? When X
can't come up with the same resolutions as Windows, is it because of a
difference in computational algorithms? (someone mentioned how X gives
width more importance) Is there no value to be gained from INF files?

So there are four actors here: the monitor which supplies EDID
information, information provided through some external file like the
Windows INF, the user who might be able to make learned configs and the
X server. I'm sure you all agree that the objective is a working
display. Additionally, you might all agree that most, if not all, of the
actions should be between the X server and the hardware, followed by
additional external information (possibly provided as a file by the
manufacturer or a database of information) and finally the user (whose
sole purpose ideally is just to pick the setting which pleases him/her
most).

It seems people have to agree first on what the ideal objectives are and
then discuss the technical aspects for achieving it.

I agree with another poster who puts value to constructive criticism.
May I also suggest that derogatory remarks or character attacks be
lessened? Also, I hope the developers "in the know" will understand that
in this community, some aren't as technically adept as they are but
would still like to understand and learn, and no amount of post
rereading is going to make it clearer IF there are information lacking
or that needs clearing.
--

Richi Plana


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]