FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-01-2009, 08:18 PM
Alex Janssen
 
Default Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller

"X -configure" produces a xorg.conf file that shows my display
controller properly, but it runs the display in 800x600. The only
options in System->Preferences->Display are 800x600 and 640x480 and it
does not recognize the monitor, a Viewsonic AW1703wb that should be run
at 1440x900. I have tried reinstalling the xserver, but no better.
I can not find any bugs reported spcifically for this issue.
U9.04 had no problems with this board or monitor.
Should I reinstall 9.04 and wait a couple of months or is there a fix?
I could try a fresh install as /home is on a different partition from /.

Alex
Intel DG35EC motherboard with 3GHz Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 250 GB HD


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 11-01-2009, 09:31 PM
 
Default Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller

Your xorg.conf may not accurately reflect your video card/monitor capabilities. Here is the 24 bit mode section for my xorg.conf.* You can use that as a template if you want to try modifying yours manually. Sounds like it may be your only option. Goes without saying that you should remove any options that do not fit your hardware's capabilities.







*** SubSection**** "Display"

******* Depth****** 24

******* Modes***** "1920x1200" "1600x1200" "1600x1024" "1600x1000" "1400x1050" "1600x900" "1280x1024" "1440x900" "1280x960" "1366x768" "1360x768" "1280x800" "1152x864" "1280x768" "1280x720" "1024x768" "1280x600" "1024x600" "800x600" "768x576" "640x480"

*** EndSubSection



Hope that works for you. For some reason the video config programs are very buggy. I always have to tweak it manually. That is bad for newbies that are new to linux.



Regards,



john




-----Original Message-----

From: Alex Janssen <alex@ourwoods.org>

To: ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Sent: Sun, Nov 1, 2009 10:18 pm

Subject: Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller











"X -configure" produces a xorg.conf file that shows my display

controller properly, but it runs the display in 800x600. The only

options in System->Preferences->Display are 800x600 and 640x480 and it

does not recognize the monitor, a Viewsonic AW1703wb that should be run

at 1440x900. I have tried reinstalling the xserver, but no better.

I can not find any bugs reported spcifically for this issue.

U9.04 had no problems with this board or monitor.

Should I reinstall 9.04 and wait a couple of months or is there a fix?

I could try a fresh install as /home is on a different partition from /.



Alex

Intel DG35EC motherboard with 3GHz Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 250 GB HD





--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users






--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 11-02-2009, 01:00 AM
Alex Janssen
 
Default Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller

fyrbrds@netscape.net wrote:
> Your xorg.conf may not accurately reflect your video card/monitor
> capabilities. Here is the 24 bit mode section for my xorg.conf. You
> can use that as a template if you want to try modifying yours
> manually. Sounds like it may be your only option. Goes without saying
> that you should remove any options that do not fit your hardware's
> capabilities.
>
> SubSection "Display"
> Depth 24
> Modes "1920x1200" "1600x1200" "1600x1024" "1600x1000"
> "1400x1050" "1600x900" "1280x1024" "1440x900" "1280x960" "1366x768"
> "1360x768" "1280x800" "1152x864" "1280x768" "1280x720" "1024x768"
> "1280x600" "1024x600" "800x600" "768x576" "640x480"
> EndSubSection
>
> Hope that works for you. For some reason the video config programs are
> very buggy. I always have to tweak it manually. That is bad for
> newbies that are new to linux.
>
> Regards,
>
> john
>
Alas. No joy, yet. I burned the iso to a cd and booted it. Same
results. 800x600. I filed a bug(#469764) on Launchpad. Reinstalled
9.04 with no problems. I don't know enough to dig into the code for the
Intel driver.

Thanks
Alex

--
Ourwoods.org
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. - Albert Einstein (275)


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 11-07-2009, 04:42 PM
Alex Janssen
 
Default Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller

fyrbrds@netscape.net wrote:
> Your xorg.conf may not accurately reflect your video card/monitor
> capabilities. Here is the 24 bit mode section for my xorg.conf. You
> can use that as a template if you want to try modifying yours
> manually. Sounds like it may be your only option. Goes without saying
> that you should remove any options that do not fit your hardware's
> capabilities.
>
> SubSection "Display"
> Depth 24
> Modes "1920x1200" "1600x1200" "1600x1024" "1600x1000"
> "1400x1050" "1600x900" "1280x1024" "1440x900" "1280x960" "1366x768"
> "1360x768" "1280x800" "1152x864" "1280x768" "1280x720" "1024x768"
> "1280x600" "1024x600" "800x600" "768x576" "640x480"
> EndSubSection
>
> Hope that works for you. For some reason the video config programs are
> very buggy. I always have to tweak it manually. That is bad for
> newbies that are new to linux.
>
> Regards,
>
> john
>
Here's the answer in case anyone else needs it.
Go to http://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Troubleshooting.
All the info you need is there. Read it.
After that I manually constructed the following xorg.conf:
*** xorg.conf ***
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Viewsonic"
ModelName "VA1703wb"
HorizSync 24.0 - 70.0
VertRefresh 50.0 - 75.0
DisplaySize 365 228
EndSection

Section "Device"
Option "NoDDC" "true"
Option "IgnoreEDID" "true"
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "intel"
VendorName "Intel Corporation"
BoardName "82G35 Express Integrated Graphics Controller"
BusID "PCI:0:2:0"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1440x900" "1360x768" "1152x864" "1024x768" "800x600"
"640x480"
EndSubSection
EndSection
***
I don't want to start a flame war. Just noting this. I would have to
say this is not for the casual computer user, like my wife(and many
others). If it doesn't work, she says "why can't I just use Windows?",
so I go fix it for her. Another reason why Windows will remain the
desktop king(but not in this crowd). We work together and I make her
use Ubuntu for her job. She hasn't used windows for 2 years, now.

Alex
Ubuntu 9.10 on Intel DG35EC motherboard w/E8400 Core 2 Duo and 4GB RAM

--
Ourwoods.org
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. - Albert Einstein (275)


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 11-07-2009, 05:22 PM
Hal Burgiss
 
Default Upgrade from 9.04 to 9.10 only displays in 800x600 on Intel 82G35 display controller

On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 12:42:19PM -0500, Alex Janssen wrote:
> I don't want to start a flame war. Just noting this. I would have to
> say this is not for the casual computer user, like my wife(and many
> others). If it doesn't work, she says "why can't I just use Windows?",
> so I go fix it for her. Another reason why Windows will remain the
> desktop king(but not in this crowd). We work together and I make her
> use Ubuntu for her job. She hasn't used windows for 2 years, now.

Of course what she means is why can't I go buy a pre-configured systems rather
than wing it and be in front of the curve. I suspect there are plenty of
people upgrading to Windows 7 themselves and *something* didn't go right with
a driver.

That being said, I don't understand all the regression issues with Intel
chipsets. The madness started with 8.10 (at least for me). I was hoping 9.10
would be the light at the end of the tunnel. (I am dutifully waiting for others
to shake it down.)

--
Hal

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org