Alan Cox wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 06:53:55AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
640x480 is incredibly small, and does not leave much room to fit
everything on the screen that is needed, so that is more or
less out of the question as far as I understand. Even 800x600
is pretty short on real estate.
640x480 is the largest *safe* resolution to use without having DDC probe
data. Anything else can cause damage.
That may or may not be true, but the likelyhood of our installer
team rewriting anaconda to fit in 640x480 seems rather unlikely,
unless people would accept a virtual screen that scrolls around,
which seems quite unprofessional.
I think having a hard requirement of 800x600 minimum is a reasonable
thing to expect nowadays. If someone has hardware that does not meet
this requirement, they should do a text mode installation instead.
Of course that's my own personal opinion, and I'm not on the
installer team. I'll let them speak for themselves if they
disagree and plan on making anaconda work in 640x480.
Yes its not a lot of space by modern standards but its not that long ago that
640x480 was hi-res, and its still way above PDA resolution. Its about how you
use it..
Another DDC item not handled is dynamic DDC changes
That's true also, but we've got far worse problems to contend
with before worrying much about that. ;o)