The fix didn't work. I just updated and now like ticket #487
shows, I cannot change the aspect ratio using 'W' to fix it. Doh!On 10/17/05, Daniel Kristjansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:Thanks for all the info, I think I found the problem.Can you try the latest SVN and tell me if it works?
On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 11:32 -0600, Greg Grotsky wrote:
> Answers below...
Thanks for all the info, I think I found the problem.
Can you try the latest SVN and tell me if it works?
The aspect ratio changes were not properly applied when the
resolution of the new video was the same as the resolutio
On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 17:57 +0100, Stuart Morgan wrote:
> On Saturday 15 Oct 2005 17:30, Daniel Kristjansson wrote:
> > I think this is narrow enough, my guess is 7334. It looks like
> Might this be related to the same problem several of us have seen for the
> last
> few weeks? In the UK the asp
Stuart, I don't think it is the same issue. Because here in the
US the channels don't change the resolution they are broadcasting in,
they only change the aspect ratio of the content and how much of the
screen it fills. The commercials and stuff that looks like 4:3 is
actually sent to us in a ful
Answers below...On 10/15/05, Daniel Kristjansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think this is narrow enough, my guess is 7334. It looks likeit is not a change in the aspect ratio code giving you problems,but rather a change in the starting video due to the signalmonitoring dummy video. The video outp
On Saturday 15 Oct 2005 17:30, Daniel Kristjansson wrote:
> I think this is narrow enough, my guess is 7334. It looks like
> it is not a change in the aspect ratio code giving you problems,
> but rather a change in the starting video due to the signal
> monitoring dummy video. The video output code
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 23:39 -0600, Greg Grotsky wrote:
> On 10/14/05, Daniel Kristjansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW log2(50) = 6 more to go...
>
> Okay, I've narrowed it down to 7325-7335. Now I can't compile 7329 or
> 7330, it's giving me:
> Does the range narrow it down enough?
On 10/14/05, Daniel Kristjansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW log2(50) = 6 more to go...
Okay, I've narrowed it down to 7325-7335. Now I can't compile 7329 or 7330, it's giving me:
g++ -c -pipe -march=k8 -Wall -W -O3 -Wall -Wno-switch
-fomit-frame-pointer `freetype-config --cflags` -D_REENTRAN
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 00:34 -0600, Greg Grotsky wrote:
> Okay I've been divide and conqureing this thing all night I've just
> verified that it works in REV7300 but not in REV7350, I'll do some
> more tomorrow unless that narrows it down enough. :) I don't suppose
> you know of a better way to fig
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005, Greg Grotsky wrote:
Okay I've been divide and conqureing this thing all night I've just verified
that it works in REV7300 but not in REV7350, I'll do some more tomorrow
unless that narrows it down enough. :) I don't suppose you know of a better
way to figure out which commit
Okay I've been divide and conqureing this thing all night I've just
verified that it works in REV7300 but not in REV7350, I'll do some more
tomorrow unless that narrows it down enough. :) I don't suppose
you know of a better way to figure out which commit it was?
If you find the commit that broke
11 matches
Mail list logo
