By the way, in fixing bug 27667 (which in a way is the corollary  to
this one) I've decided to chuck the CRT resolution algorithm.
Of course, that fix actually exacerbates this particular bug, giving us
a regression on CRTs.  However, as pointed out above, even for CRTs its
a bad default algorithm.  I suppose in the "old days" CRTs may only have
had one resolution that was too high to read, so tossing the highest
would give adequate results.  These days, as Mantas demonstrates, CRTs
can support resolutions far, far beyond what's appropriate for default
desktop use.

The good news is that this gives us a clean slate.  I'd like to work
with you guys to achieve a much superior algorithm for CRTs, that will
scale better into the future than our old algorithm did.

One factor we must keep in mind though, is that currently xresprobe
can't tell the difference between a CRT and an LCD with an "analog"
connection.  The way it tries to tell LCDs and CRTs apart is to get the
output from ddcprobe and scan for "*digital*".  Unfortunately, the LCDs
I have to test with have VGA connections and are listed as "analog", and
thus get detected by xresprobe as CRTs.

So, we need either of two things.  One would be a general purpose
algorithm that solves the CRT needs and doesn't impact LCDs.  The other
is to find a better mechanism for identifying LCDs that ddcprobe shows
as "analog".  If either of these can be satisfied, then it should be
straightforward to implement an algorithm such as the one Mantas
proposes.

I'd really like to see this solved for Gutsy, since otherwise we're
going to show a regression on this bug.  So I would greatly appreciate
any research / advice / ideas people have on this one.

-- 
Default Resolution on high quality CRT monitors is too high
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/68654
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to