Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:59 PM, James G. Sack (jim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>> Carl Lowenstein wrote:
>>  > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:16 PM, James G. Sack (jim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>> wrote:
>>  >> Carl Lowenstein wrote:
>>  >>  > I have noticed over the past couple of days that PostScript text files
>>  >>  > viewed with gv(1) looked sort of funny on my new wide-screen LCD
>>  >>  > display.  Not scaled the same horizontally and vertically, so the
>>  >>  > characters were squeezed one way or another.  Also the on-screen page
>>  >>  > size had the wrong aspect ratio.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > Got myself a clue -- gv uses its internal knowledge of the screen
>>  >>  > dimensions to scale the display.  Sure enough, when I changed State ->
>>  >>  > Setup Options -> Screen Size from 361x292 mm to 524x321 mm, everything
>>  >>  > looked right again.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > I don't remember setting 361x292 myself in the past, maybe it happened
>>  >>  > when gv was installed.  Anyhow, one can learn the screen dimensions by
>>  >>  > running xrandr(1x) or by taking the metric measuring tape to the
>>  >>  > actual display.
>>  >>
>>  >>  I've forgotten how to find what the system currently thinks the physical
>>  >>  dimensions (or dpi settings) are. Is it available in xrandr output -- I
>>  >>  don't see it? Am I missing something?
>>  >>
>>  > This is the first couple of lines that I get from xrandr.
>>  >
>>  > [EMAIL PROTECTED] postscript]$ xrandr
>>  >  SZ:    Pixels          Physical       Refresh
>>  > *0   1920 x 1200   ( 524mm x 321mm )  *60
>>  >
>>  >     carl
>>
>>  Hmmm, on xrandr version 1.2, from xorg-x11-utils-7.1-4.fc7 I get
>>
>>  Screen 0: minimum 320 x 175, current 1600 x 1200, maximum 1600 x 1200
>>  default connected 1600x1200+0+0 0mm x 0mm
>>    1600x1200      75.0*    70.0     65.0     60.0
>>  ...
>>
>>  What version of xrandr is in your machine?
>>
>>  Hmmm, on another machine (1.2 in xorg-x11-utils-7.3-1.fc8) I see
>>    "..connected.. 320mm x 240mm
>>
>>  As greg offered, xdpyinfo does give seemingly authoritative answers.
>>
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] postscript]$ rpm -qf $(which xrandr)
> xorg-x11-6.8.2-1.FC3.45.2
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] postscript]$ xrandr --version
> Server reports RandR version 1.1
> 
> Looks like an improvement on its successors.

heh!

..j


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to