xrandr dual-screen usability survery
Eirik Byrkjeflot Anonsen
eirik at opera.com
Thu Feb 18 05:28:42 PST 2010
Eeri Kask <Eeri.Kask at inf.tu-dresden.de> writes:
> Am 17 Feb 2010 12:38:16, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher at 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. It's not policy to remove
>> zaphod mode, but none of the active Xorg developers that I know
>> of use it and very few users overall use it, so it doesn't get
>> tested much.
>> We are all busy so it's not a high priority.
> Is it correct to deduce, nvidia software engineers either
> (1) are not busy, or
Which could simply mean that they have a larger ratio of developer
resources to work items.
> (2) don't discriminate less widespread X11-technology use cases?
This is certainly not true. Pretty much any driver team will
"discriminate against less widespread X11-technology use cases". As
long as you have two or more things you want to do, it is a safe bet
that one of them will have higher priority than the other. And I think
it is a safe bet that widely used features will tend to have higher
priority than little used features.
There could also be technical reasons why it is easier to maintain
zaphod mode in the nvidia driver. Maybe their architecture made it easy
to implement proper xrandr support without breaking zaphod.
Or maybe it's just that some of their engineers actually use zaphod and
thus fixes the problems when they show up.
More information about the xorg