here ou not here ?

[Éric Piel]

Op 16-11-09 19:11, Bernard Siaud alias Troumad schreef:
> Hello
> 
> I post here, but I have no answer.
> I do not know if I really post when he should.
> 
> I mentioned the problem of man xrandr I find wrong for panning option.
> 
> Now, I test the option scale for xrandr. And I found some problems with 
> maximizing windows. Whenever I change the scale of the two screens to 
> display the same as another.
> 1) VGA1 1440x900 and LVDS1 1280x800
> xrandr --output LVDS1 --scale 1.125x1.125
> Sometimes the maximized window does not fill the screen.
> 2) VGA1 1280x1024 and LVDS1 1280x800
> xrandr --output VGA1 --scale 1.000000x0.781250
> Each time the bottom of the maximized window is too low. As the height 
> of the screen was still 1024. I think.

Hi Bernard,
I think there are several problem/difficulties with your bug report:
* It's actually quite hard to reproduce, because someone needs to have
two screens with the same dimensions as yours (or so it sounds)
* You should provide a simple list of commands to reproduce your bug (a
C program is too complicated!)
* A screenshot of the bug would be very helpful, the problem you have
described is hard to grasp precisely.
* This bug can be coming from lots of different places, so you have to
define precisely your system's component and the version. In particular,
say which window manager (gnome, KDE?), graphic driver, xorg version,
and kernel version you are using.
* It would help a lot to also give the output of xrandr --verbose when
the bug happens.

All that said, here is what I understand:
You are trying to do cloning, but one of the screen has a bigger area
than the other one, so you zoom the smaller screen to have the same
pixel size as the bigger one (1440x900 too). aka:
xrandr --output VGA1 --mode 1440x900 --pos 0x0  --output LVDS1 --mode
1280x800 --pos 0x0 --scale 1.125x1.125

Then you expect your window manager to maximize the window to 1440x900.
Too bad, your window manager maximizes the window to only 1280x800, the
original smaller of the screens. That's a bug. Sounds like your window
manager have trouble reading the actual size of the output (it's too
much looking at the physical mode). Or maybe it's your graphic driver
which is not reporting the correct values.

Is this right? If so, post the info, as described in the previous points.

For the info, here, with intel driver 2.9 and gnome 2.28, it works fine.

Eric