User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Posted Mar 26, 2011 2:27 UTC (Sat) by roelofs (guest, #2599)
In reply to: Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it by paulj
Parent article: Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Ha, yes. I did this too - destroyed a monitor by running it at slightly too high a refresh rate, on its maximum resolution, with a custom modeline. :)

Yeah, we've all been there. Though in my case, the monitor in question (KFC 17", I think) claimed to support 1280x1024 at 60 Hz, so I didn't feel too bad about sticking them for an in-warranty replacement. I had to wait about six weeks for the damn thing, though.

Haven't destroyed anything since then, but ironically enough, I did end up mucking with modelines and deep X voodoo not too long ago, trying (futilely) to get a stupid onboard Intel chipset to do 1920x1200. I'm still kind of annoyed by that one...

Greg


(Log in to post comments)

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Posted Mar 26, 2011 6:19 UTC (Sat) by malor (guest, #2973) [Link]

That was the big selling point of the expensive 'multisync' monitors -- you couldn't wreck them that way. :-) All monitors these days are multisync; they just ignore signals they can't correctly reproduce.

Fixed-frequency monitors were much cheaper, but they were scary to use with Linux. It was sooo easy to get a modeline wrong.

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Posted Mar 26, 2011 20:40 UTC (Sat) by roelofs (guest, #2599) [Link]

That was the big selling point of the expensive 'multisync' monitors -- you couldn't wreck them that way. :-)

"Expensive" being the key word... This was a multisync, but either it didn't have the circuitry to detect out-of-range signals, or else its parts were borderline. (It did survive my settings for at least a couple of months, and I believe its replacement did, too, though it's possible I tweaked things.)

Hmmm...just found a 1997 XF86Config:

Section "Monitor"

    Identifier  "KFC 17-inch"
    VendorName  "Kuo Feng Corporation"
    ModelName   "CA-1726"

    Bandwidth   110.0
    HorizSync   31-70   # multisync
    VertRefresh 45-90   # multisync

    [...]

    # 67Hz 1152x864 mode (hsync = 63.1kHz, refresh = 67Hz)
    Mode "1152x864"
        DotClock        100.0
        HTimings        1152 1200 1296 1504
        VTimings        864 866 869 904
        Flags           "-HSync", "-VSync"
    EndMode

    # better 1280x1024 mode (hsync = 64kHz, refresh = 60Hz)
    Mode "1280x1024"
        DotClock        110.0
        HTimings        1280 1288 1472 1712
        VTimings        1024 1025 1028 1054
    EndMode

EndSection

I had forgotten all about interlaced modes (one of the 1024x768 settings) and the need for special, lower-res modes to accommodate graphics cards that either didn't have enough memory to support 16bpp at full res (e.g., 2MB ATI Mach32) or couldn't crank up the dot clock high enough or both.

Good ol' days, indeed...

Greg

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Posted Mar 26, 2011 23:09 UTC (Sat) by malor (guest, #2973) [Link]

I'm pretty sure that must be a later-generation XConfig. The ones I was working on weren't nearly that friendly. They were more compact, using single lines where you've got stanzas. It was best to use a calculator to figure out the correct numbers, and very easy to get it wrong.

Multisyncs aren't *supposed* to be killable by any input, but obviously your experience disagrees. :-)

What I always lusted over was the early Sony multisyncs. Those were beautiful monitors.

Slackware 13.37: Linux for the fun of it

Posted Mar 26, 2011 23:37 UTC (Sat) by roelofs (guest, #2599) [Link]

I'm pretty sure that must be a later-generation XConfig. The ones I was working on weren't nearly that friendly. They were more compact, using single lines where you've got stanzas.

Yup, my early-1994 ones were like you describe, and the one I excerpted still has equivalent commented-out lines like that:

#   ModeLine "1280x1024a" 110 1280 1320 1480 1728 1024 1029 1036 1077
#   ModeLine "1280x1024"  110 1280 1288 1472 1712 1024 1025 1028 1054

Was that an X11R5-vs-R6 change, maybe?

As you say, it was very easy to get wrong, which is why, in slightly later releases, the bundled text file(s) showing other people's working configs for card/monitor combos were so valuable.

What I always lusted over was the early Sony multisyncs. Those were beautiful monitors.

That they were. I eventually bought a used Hitachi 21" with the same (Trinitron-style) shadow mask; it's still sitting on my desk behind the LCD. :-)

Greg


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds