| 1 |
On 2016-09-25, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> And I find it very useful to be able to leave 2 of the screens as-is |
| 4 |
>> while I switch the third one to do something else. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> The results of your searches and experiments seem to suggest that it |
| 7 |
>>> is n unusual configuration |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> It is, though I don't know why -- I find it far more useful than have |
| 10 |
>> one giant desktop. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>>> and I'm wondering what particular itch this scratches. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> It allows me to work efficiently on complex tasks while concurrently |
| 15 |
>> responding to emails and handling interruptions. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> I do something with a sort-of similar result. One big desktop across |
| 18 |
> all screens with at least 6 virtual desktop. Stuff I need always |
| 19 |
> there (like mail and IM clients) go off to one side on the small |
| 20 |
> monitor, pinned to all virtual desktops. None of the other real work |
| 21 |
> stuff goes on the small monitor. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> This won't suit Grant though, as he said his nVidia card can't big |
| 24 |
> desktop across 3 physical 1600 monitors |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
That part of the problem _might_ go away. The card is scheduled for |
| 27 |
replacement soon. It's no longer supported by the latest nvidia |
| 28 |
driver, and it has required me to mask xorg-server 1.18, which, in |
| 29 |
turn has forced me to mask the latest stable versions of a couple |
| 30 |
other things. That's not a big deal yet, but it's only going to get |
| 31 |
worse. So I've got a new nvidia card picked out. The old one is only |
| 32 |
8 years old, and it still works perfectly, but I guess that's |
| 33 |
progress. Though all of the nvidia cards supported by latest drivers |
| 34 |
have fans. :/ |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I've been testing the openbox/tint2 setup on my single-screen laptop |
| 37 |
using an Xnest display with three screens. So far, so good. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
<whine> |
| 40 |
Whenever I report a bug related to multi-screen support, the excuse is |
| 41 |
always "none of the developers have access to multi-screen systems, so |
| 42 |
nobody can work on this". Really? People who are developing X11 |
| 43 |
desktop infrastructure don't know enough to type "Xnest -scrns 3 |
| 44 |
-geometry 640x480 :1"? I think what they actually mean is "none of |
| 45 |
the developers use multi-screen setups in their daily work, so nobody |
| 46 |
cares about this enough to fix it." I'd have a lot more repspect for |
| 47 |
that -- at least it's honest. |
| 48 |
</whine> |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
Grant |
Archives