On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Alex Deucher wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:38:16PM -0500:
So fine, here's the yearly zaphod fix:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati/commit/?id=579cdcf9b4e38c791a497b747a055fc0a07d8dd6
I'm afraid
Alex Deucher wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:38:16PM -0500:
So fine, here's the yearly zaphod fix:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati/commit/?id=579cdcf9b4e38c791a497b747a055fc0a07d8dd6
I'm afraid this doesn't quite do it.
It corrects the mistake of detecting DVI (see
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:10:07 -0600
Jesse W. Hathaway je...@mbuki-mvuki.org wrote:
Martin Cracauer:
Overall my original impression has been reinforced: you basically
dropped what hackers need when getting work done on a desktop Unix
machine in favor of what managerish types coming from
Am 17 Feb 2010 12:38:16, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com schrieb:
And aside from that, didn't you say earlier that the Intel
driver actually has it removed and that it is official Xorg
policy that keeping classic dual-screen alive is not intended?
Yes, the intel driver has removed it.
Eeri Kask wrote:
Am 17 Feb 2010 12:38:16, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com schrieb:
And aside from that, didn't you say earlier that the Intel
driver actually has it removed and that it is official Xorg
policy that keeping classic dual-screen alive is not intended?
Yes, the intel driver
Am 02/18/2010 03:57 PM, Alan Coopersmith schrieb:
or (3) have paying customers who want it to be supported, so it's
worth them spending the time needed on it? (I have no knowledge
of whether that's the case or not, it just seems like an obvious
possibility that you overlooked, since Nvidia
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
Debian/Stable. That is the same Debian that has the Xorg server with
classic dualhead effectively removed.
The goal is to see how practical xrandr is for dual-screen purposes,
today.
I started the X11 server with 1400x1050
Martin Cracauer, le Wed 17 Feb 2010 09:45:25 -0500, a écrit :
Before I pass final verdict, what would be involved in -say- hacking
up fvwm2 to deal with xrandr?
Note
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=395500
Actually you just need to restart fvwm to make it notice the new
Martin Cracauer:
Overall my original impression has been reinforced: you basically
dropped what hackers need when getting work done on a desktop Unix
machine in favor of what managerish types coming from Windows need
when standing in front of a projector and need to get their
single-task
Martin Cracauer wrote:
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
Debian/Stable. That is the same Debian that has the Xorg server with
classic dualhead effectively removed.
Isn't classic dualhead removed by the specific drivers? I didn't
think anything had
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
Debian/Stable. That is the same Debian that has the Xorg server with
classic dualhead effectively removed.
The goal is to see how practical xrandr
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Alan Coopersmith wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 07:34:01AM -0800:
Martin Cracauer wrote:
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
Debian/Stable. That is the same Debian that has the Xorg
Alex Deucher wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:35:37AM -0500:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
Debian/Stable. ?That is the same Debian that has the Xorg server with
classic
Martin Cracauer, le Wed 17 Feb 2010 10:50:12 -0500, a écrit :
Thanks for the fvwm2 tip, I'll try that later. Of course it won't do
anything about the other client problems and the virtual desktop
switching.
Note that virtual desktop switching is handled by fvwm2 too. Initially
I thought
Samuel Thibault wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 05:10:19PM +0100:
Martin Cracauer, le Wed 17 Feb 2010 10:50:12 -0500, a ?crit :
Thanks for the fvwm2 tip, I'll try that later. Of course it won't do
anything about the other client problems and the virtual desktop
switching.
Note that
Samuel Thibault wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 05:29:12PM +0100:
Martin Cracauer, le Wed 17 Feb 2010 11:17:52 -0500, a ?crit :
Apart from that, in the movie situation wouldn't clients that open
dialog boxes in the middle of what they think is the screen obscure
parts of the movie at random
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Alex Deucher wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:35:37AM -0500:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Here are the results of my quick survey of Window Managers present in
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:38:18 -0500
Martin Cracauer craca...@cons.org wrote:
Samuel Thibault wrote on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 05:29:12PM +0100:
Martin Cracauer, le Wed 17 Feb 2010 11:17:52 -0500, a ?crit :
Apart from that, in the movie situation wouldn't clients that open
dialog boxes in
18 matches
Mail list logo
