On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Sven Luther wrote: > I don't really agree here, modes are for the outgoing resolution, not > the input viewport. it would be far simpler to keep this simple > acceptation, and add a new keyword for defining the input viewport.
Have you looked at the "Stretch" option on say the NeoMagic driver ? I have a 1024x768 laptop display, and by default (ie unless I use option "noStretch") all modes are stretched to fill the screen. Thus the modes (and modelines) describe the viewport size, not the output resolution. So I don't agree with your description of what the words currently mean. Using "viewport" to describe the visible pixels of the framebuffer and "modes" to describe the pixels of the monitor would be logical and consistent, but it does mean a change from the way "modes" is considered now. -- Dr. Andrew C. Aitchison Computer Officer, DPMMS, Cambridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~werdna _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
