Re: tibook+vga
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 17:50, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 12:17, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 02:32, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > when I switch from X to console and used less to view some log file and
> > scrolled backwards, there was a stripe reproducing itself...
> > Unfortunately I cannot reproduce this... and I was unable to trigger it
> > again...
>
> The radeonfb console acceleration can get confused when running X
> without Option "UseFBDev". I use
>
> for i in off on; do fbset -accel $i; done
>
> as a workaround. But maybe it even works with "UseFBDev"? The behaviour
> is undefined, but that doesn't mean we can't be lucky. :)
:-) well I am not know to be lucky hard/softwarewise ...
As promised I checked all the stuff today on an external DFP... and no
it does not work... the DFP got detected but was not displaying
anything... But when I used
Option "MonitorLayout" "TMDS"
then it displayed the 1280x854 (although it should have been 1280x1024
-> ugly stretching on the DFP). forcing 1280x1024 makes it work, but the
internal DFP flicker (and I got scared of destroying something).
> > > Yes, the driver probes for an external display via DDC and disables
> > > output if it doesn't detect one. You could override this with Option
> > > "MonitorLayout" though.
> >
> > True... Indeed if I leave out the above Modes option and start X without
> > an external CRT but later on attach one, I also get some output on the
> > monitor... it is a bit darker in the top though (wrong mode...)...
> >
> > With attached monitor the resolution of the external monitor is choosen,
> > which is why I felt like I need the Mode option... Maybe infact I don't.
>
> You may indeed need to limit the virtual resolution, and your method would have
> worked if it wasn't for the bug.
But the resolution got limited as I was using DDC... so I really had
1280x854 as the true resolution on a 1280x1024 desktop...
> > I am still looking for 'the' solution, where one uses the internal DFP
> > most of the time then connects an external CRT/DFP and makes use of that
> > one without having to restart X...
> >
> > I thought I could do this by using a multihead config with two displays
> > :0.0 and :0.1 but there I had the problem that the mouse cursor was
> > somehow only on :0.1 and I did not know how to set the mouse to be on
> > :0.0 ...
>
> The mouse pointer should work the same way as with Xinerama, but moving
> windows between the heads probably requires special support as found
> e.g. in GTK as of 2.2.
Well, I really tried it out. I started gnome2 and had the panel and
background image on both screens. Nautilus/appletts etc were only on
:0.0 ... opening a window on :0.1 and starting a window manager there
made me feel quite comfortable with using the second head.
However I first have the mouse on :0.0 when I move it too far right/down
it is gone and now on :0.1 ... but there I had no chance to move it back
to :0.0 :-/
I would prefer to set the mouse button to :0.0 or :0.1 manually by using
some program... but don't know any of those...
> > A different option would be to use a xinerama mode, and have a program
> > to somehow en/disable the mouse going to the external display...
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know of a way to achieve this, but again I
> suspect that the mouse would be less of a problem than windows.
well true, but I can for now live with certain windows beeing only on
:0.1 and some on :0
> > Very good job Michael !
>
> But I only do my small part... thank all the people working hard on
> XFree86, in particular Hui Yu for his great radeon driver work.
Ok.
> > It is a pity that XFree86 is not yet capable of adding displays
> > dynamically like osx can... that would indeed "rock".
>
> True. The combination of http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=276 and
> xrandr might be interesting.
Indeed that could already be the first really usable workaround (comment
#49) until pseudorama (comment #51 above) is fully supported...
I don't know the randr extensions, but are these already supported, if
so then it is really worth trying out the above patches.
Soeren.
Reply to: