http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17255
--- Comment #19 from Ethan Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-25 10:27:54 PST --- > Well everybody used 1280x1024, but I'm not too sure that the monitors were > really 5:4. I've got a 19" CRT here for instance which clearly is 4:3, and > there were lots of similar monitors around that time. And especially the > cheaper ones, while they could run 1600x1200, it was unusable due to fuzziness > and restriction to 60Hz, so everybody just used 1280x1024 on them. But you may > be right some might indeed have been 5:4. Yes, as I said, I measured it. >Anyway, even if the monitor in > question here really is 5:4 physically, there's nothing in the edid data which > would indicate this - in fact edid just shows it's 4:3. So there's absolutely > nothing the driver could do to figure out it should indeed chose a 5:4 > resolution by default. Keep a database of accurate EDIDs to use for all known monitors. I thought you guy already did something like this. I was always under the impression that monitor EDIDs in general have never been accurate at all, this reaffirms that. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ xorg-driver-ati mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-driver-ati
