On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 13:32 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > > And as I said, that behaviour is equally 'wrong'. The other distros > > you've tried probably aren't using kernel modesetting, hence the > > differing behaviour. > > I'm having a problem understanding how something that has long been > functioning acceptably can be considered wrong. It allows you to set modes that the monitor isn't actually capable of. > I posit that KMS > configurations simply aren't yet mature enough to deal with absent DDC/EDID. You posit incorrectly. :) The case of absent monitor information is explicitly handled by using a generic monitor configuration which is restricted to a maximum 1024x768 resolution, in order to avoid the possibility of hardware damage. (Yes, you say only really old monitors can be damaged, but hey, that depends on your perspective. To me, *your* monitors are already 'really old', but obviously you want us to care about those. Why should we care about a _small inconvenience_ to your ancient monitors, but not _irreversible damage_ to someone else's slightly-more-ancient ones?) It occurs to me that drakx11 in Mandriva probably still allows manual monitor configuration; do you have to do this on Mandriva to make it work? If so, that would explain why it 'works' in Mandriva, selecting a monitor (or high-resolution-capable 'generic' monitor definition) in Mandriva is equivalent to manually sticking a monitor definition in your xorg.conf in Fedora. I don't know anything about how other distributions handle it. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
