On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 11:36:33 -0700, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 12:33 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > > There is a small fly in this ointment. The above may work, usually, > > but very far from always. For example, if monitor EDID data are > > faulty or not present at all, and this is _not_ a hypothetical > > situation, then a configuration you are getting is busted. Also > > something which is possible, and even "correct" in some sense, does > > not need to be optimal/desired in a given situation. > > Perfect is the enemy of good. > > Ajax has in the past asked for /anybody/ to provide him situations where > the EDID is bogus. I have had a ticket open since last February where the driver ignores a monitor because it doesn't do EDID and ends up not sending any signal to the DVI port (I suspect it is getting sent to the VGA port). I have to patch xorg-x11-drv-ati everytime a new version becomes available. This actually works pretty well, but is still annoying. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
