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

Re: ubuntu bulletproof x



On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 20:34 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > On 9/2/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell gmail com> wrote:
> >> Isn't the fact that windows works with them a pretty good demonstration?
> > 
> > Sadly we don't have access to that source code now do we. Please keep
> > the rhetorical comments to a minimum.
> 
> Seems pretty objective to me...

Windows does almost exactly what we do.  It uses the EDID information if
it can be found, otherwise it constructs a list of candidate modes based
on sync ranges.  Some of them will be out of range for the monitor; it
happens to have better UI for reverting to the older settings.

>   >> Is he suggesting that windows uses magic?  I thought he meant instead
> >> that X doesn't use the information sensibly.
> > 
> > Are you asking me to-reinterpret Mr. Jackson's statements for
> > additional implied meaning?

Please, call me ajax.  The only people who call me Adam or Mr. Jackson
are telemarketers and judges.

> Yes, in particular:
> 
>    "So you end up in some pretty hilarious situations, because
>     X prefers width over height, so even though your monitor's
>     1600x1200, the sync range is big enough to fit 1680x1050,
>     so you'll try to fit that, and lose."
> 
> I interpret that as an X issue, not a lack of information in the inf file.

It's debatable whether that logic in X is a bug or not.  It's certainly
correct when sorting modes smaller than the native screen size: your
field of vision is much wider than it is tall, so X should prefer wider
modes.

You only ever hit it as a bug in configuration when X can't query the
monitor for its native aspect ratio, and you only manually specify sync
ranges.

The inf file does not give you aspect ratio.  It only gives you sync
ranges.

- ajax


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