| 1 |
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Kevin O'Gorman <kogorman@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Paul Hartman |
| 3 |
> <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Kevin O'Gorman <kogorman@×××××.com> |
| 6 |
>> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> > |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 10 |
>> >> |
| 11 |
>> >> On 24 August 2010 11:23, Adam Carter <adamcarter3@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 12 |
>> >> > |
| 13 |
>> >> >> No. I ditched my xorg.conf completely; it had been there just |
| 14 |
>> >> >> because |
| 15 |
>> >> >> I |
| 16 |
>> >> >> couldn't get the Westinghouse monitor to work without it. The Xorg |
| 17 |
>> >> >> logs |
| 18 |
>> >> >> show it recognizes a boatload of |
| 19 |
>> >> >> modes that the monitor likes, but gives an alibi for not using the |
| 20 |
>> >> >> HD |
| 21 |
>> >> >> ones. The approach |
| 22 |
>> >> >> does not seem promising. |
| 23 |
>> >> >> |
| 24 |
>> >> >> /var/log/Xorg.0.log attached. I'm paying attention to lines 269 295 |
| 25 |
>> >> >> 327 |
| 26 |
>> >> >> 369 377 380 and 381 |
| 27 |
>> >> >> |
| 28 |
>> >> >> 269: (II) MACH64(0): Modeline "1920x1080"x0.0 148.50 1920 2008 |
| 29 |
>> >> >> 2052 |
| 30 |
>> >> >> 2200 1080 1084 1089 1125 +hsync +vsync (67.5 kHz) |
| 31 |
>> >> >> 295: (II) MACH64(0): Modeline "1920x1080"x60.0 172.80 1920 2040 |
| 32 |
>> >> >> 2248 |
| 33 |
>> >> >> 2576 1080 1081 1084 1118 -hsync +vsync (67.1 kHz) |
| 34 |
>> >> >> 327: (II) MACH64(0): Estimated virtual size for aspect ratio 1.7931 |
| 35 |
>> >> >> is |
| 36 |
>> >> >> 1920x1080 |
| 37 |
>> >> >> 369: (II) MACH64(0): Not using default mode "1920x1440" |
| 38 |
>> >> >> (insufficient |
| 39 |
>> >> >> memory for mode) |
| 40 |
>> >> >> 377: (II) MACH64(0): Not using driver mode "1920x1080" (bad mode |
| 41 |
>> >> >> clock/interlace/doublescan) |
| 42 |
>> >> >> 380: (II) MACH64(0): Not using driver mode "1920x1080" (bad mode |
| 43 |
>> >> >> clock/interlace/doublescan) |
| 44 |
>> >> >> 381: (WW) MACH64(0): Shrinking virtual size estimate from 1920x1080 |
| 45 |
>> >> >> to |
| 46 |
>> >> >> 1280x1024 |
| 47 |
>> >> >> |
| 48 |
>> >> > |
| 49 |
>> >> > I assume 269 and 295 are related to 377 and 380. I remember i had a |
| 50 |
>> >> > lot |
| 51 |
>> >> > of |
| 52 |
>> >> > pain getting a Geforce 440MX to do 16:9, but it was all in the |
| 53 |
>> >> > modelines. |
| 54 |
>> >> > There are some modeline calculators on the web, but be warned that |
| 55 |
>> >> > some |
| 56 |
>> >> > of |
| 57 |
>> >> > them produce bad output. I did eventually get it to work after a lot |
| 58 |
>> >> > of |
| 59 |
>> >> > trial and error. |
| 60 |
>> >> > |
| 61 |
>> >> > Also because of this; |
| 62 |
>> >> > |
| 63 |
>> >> > (II) MACH64(0): <default monitor>: Using hsync range of 30.00-85.00 |
| 64 |
>> >> > kHz |
| 65 |
>> >> > (II) MACH64(0): <default monitor>: Using vrefresh range of |
| 66 |
>> >> > 55.00-75.00 |
| 67 |
>> >> > Hz |
| 68 |
>> >> > (II) MACH64(0): <default monitor>: Using maximum pixel clock of |
| 69 |
>> >> > 160.00 |
| 70 |
>> >> > MHz |
| 71 |
>> >> > |
| 72 |
>> >> > |
| 73 |
>> >> > you may need to set the ranges in your xorg.conf instead. check the |
| 74 |
>> >> > monitors |
| 75 |
>> >> > specs first tho. |
| 76 |
>> >> |
| 77 |
>> >> What does xrandr -q show? |
| 78 |
>> >> -- |
| 79 |
>> >> Regards, |
| 80 |
>> >> Mick |
| 81 |
>> >> |
| 82 |
>> > |
| 83 |
>> > treat log # xrandr -q |
| 84 |
>> > Screen 0: minimum 320 x 240, current 1280 x 1024, maximum 1440 x 1024 |
| 85 |
>> > default connected 1280x1024+0+0 0mm x 0mm |
| 86 |
>> > 1280x1024 60.0* |
| 87 |
>> > 1440x900 60.0 |
| 88 |
>> > 1280x960 60.0 |
| 89 |
>> > 1152x864 75.0 |
| 90 |
>> > 1024x768 75.0 70.0 60.0 |
| 91 |
>> > 896x672 60.0 |
| 92 |
>> > 832x624 75.0 |
| 93 |
>> > 800x600 75.0 72.0 60.0 56.0 65.0 |
| 94 |
>> > 700x525 75.0 60.0 |
| 95 |
>> > 640x512 75.0 60.0 |
| 96 |
>> > 640x480 75.0 73.0 67.0 60.0 |
| 97 |
>> > 720x400 70.0 |
| 98 |
>> > 576x432 75.0 |
| 99 |
>> > 512x384 75.0 70.0 60.0 |
| 100 |
>> > 416x312 75.0 |
| 101 |
>> > 400x300 75.0 72.0 60.0 56.0 |
| 102 |
>> > 320x240 75.0 73.0 60.0 |
| 103 |
>> > treat log # |
| 104 |
>> |
| 105 |
>> Until you can replace the video card, maybe you can come up with a |
| 106 |
>> modeline for a lower resolution with 16:9 aspect ratio, such as: |
| 107 |
>> |
| 108 |
>> 852x480 |
| 109 |
>> 1280x720 |
| 110 |
>> 1365x768 |
| 111 |
>> 1600x900 |
| 112 |
>> |
| 113 |
>> It wouldn't be optimal, but at least it would fill your screen without |
| 114 |
>> being stretched strangely. |
| 115 |
>> |
| 116 |
> |
| 117 |
> Yah, I might have some luck with that. Since I'm years out of practice |
| 118 |
> fooling with this stuff (last seen in 2002) can someone point me at the |
| 119 |
> tools for |
| 120 |
> 1) Computing a modeline (I understand the quality varies a lot) |
| 121 |
> 2) Configuring an xorg.conf |
| 122 |
|
| 123 |
Check out x11-apps/amlc -- it has an interactive modeline generator |
| 124 |
where you tell it the aspect ratio & size of your screen and it spits |
| 125 |
out modelines for you. You'll still need to fill in the |
| 126 |
HSync/VSync/Clock speed stuff. |
Archives