Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I followed the instructions in Ubuntu Beginners Guide to import screen configuration from manufacturer disk.
I used:
gksudo displayconfig-gtk
and imported the *.inf file for my monitor from disk (Samsung SyncMaster T220)
I then selected my model (Samsung -> etc.) in displayconfig-gtk.
After reboot, I could no longer set the screen to its full resolution (1680x1050). When I tried to redefine the model to Generic -> Plug and Play it would allow me to use only ridiculously low resolutions.
Since installation the configuration had been Generic -> Plug'n Play and it worked great, correct resolution and everything, until now.
Here's just one suggestion, though there are other 'tools' you can use:
Edit your xorg.conf file by hand. (Yes, I know, but there are sooo many tools to do it for you!). Chances are, the tool you used botched your config file.
While I realize that your new-to-LQ-ness does not necessarily mean that you are new to Linux also, just in case, if you would like some tips on figuring out what's what in your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file, post its contents for us.
Nice, I see you used the advice given in the file and it worked! Cool, but what if you want/need to fix this stuff by hand at some point? Or simply want to know *why* it works or doesn't work?
Here's what I would have posted, had you not fixed it yourself:
The way it works in the given configuration, is that all those 'modelines' in the monitor section define identified resolutions that the monitor is allegedly able to operate at. Then, in the 'screen' section (the FIRST screen section) is where the combination of monitor, device, and screen are combined to give you your video output onto the monitor.
Once again, it appears that the tool used to create the config file has simple added stuff to the file, stuff that is in contradiction with what else is already in there.
Personally, I do not use modelines, and I find them unnecessary. It's always been just as easy for me (easier in fact) to make a simple setup defining only the resolution I want to use. This does not allow for on-the-fly changing of your display resolution, but then, I haven't even found a need to do that; I use 1680x1050 all the time. Note that many/some other users DO like to use modelines, and perhaps consider them necessary. And if you do like to switch resolutions on the fly, you'll want to expand upon what I suggest below.
First thing to do is to look and see if a backup was made of your original xorg.conf when the tool did the editing. Often there is a backup made. If there is (and it contains your old configuration) simple rename the backup to 'xorg.conf' and the problem is un-done.
If there's no usable backup, here's what I would do:
1) delete the bottom screen and monitor and device sections with the identifiers 'monitor1' and 'screen1' and 'device1'
2) delete all the modelines (or comment them out if you want to reference them for some reason)
3) edit your remaining 'screen' section which looks like this:
And that should be sufficient to allow you to startup X at max resolution again.
Note that I left a few of those other modes there in the screen section. You can delete them if you only want the max resolution.
Also, not that I did not give refresh rates in the modes; this is because the monitor is quite capable of deciding for itself, what refresh rate it should use for a given resolution.
Thanks a lot, Sasha. I'm beginning to understand how it works. Pity the author of that book didn't mention the config file associated with the utility. It would have made things easier. It made many backups of xorg.conf, in fact.
A couple of questions, if I may:
1) In subsection "Display" under "Screen", there is an entry titled "Virtual". What does that mean?
My desktop kinda didn't fit the screen during my configuration eclipse, and I'm wondering why. Could the virtual size of the desktop have been set to a size different than screen resolution?
2) every mode in the above mentioned subsection has a corresponding modeline in "Monitor", with a lot of data following the resolution & refresh rate values. I assume that if they are left out they will be determined automatically? Just like what would happen if I left out the entire modeline? 'cause I was already looking through my monitor's manual to try and find the correct values to put there....
I guess a lot of it can be answered by reading the xorg.conf manual page.
Anyways - thanks again for helping me figure this out.
The answer to your question #1 is "yes". There are more than one way to do it, but you can certainly have a desktop that is larger than your actual displayed screen size. The way I have done it in the past was like (for example):
modes "1600x1200@1280x1024" # note: I can't remember which goes first-- the virtual or the actual
This would tell the X server that you want to have a virtual desktop size of 1600x1200 but you would like it to be displayed on a monitor that only has a 1280x1024 resolution. I used this in the past because my main monitor was 1600x1200 but my second monitor at the time (to the right of the main one) would only give 1280x1024, and this caused minor annoyances when mousing from one monitor to the other. By using a virtual desktop, both monitor images were horizontally level with each other, and if I needed to get to the very bottom of the image on the smaller monitor, the image will automatically pan upwards when you near the bottom, and when you mouse back to the top, the image pans back downwards.
In short, the virtual thingy definitely contributed to the image not fitting the monitor properly during your eclipse
Question #2 - 'modelines' I believe, should be either complete, with all their parameters, or not there at all. I suppose the X server (and the hardware) is probably clever enough to decide that a modeline is borked/botched and will ignore it if necessary. The monitor (any modern monitor that is not SUPER old as heck) will decide for itself what vertical refresh rates and horizontal scan frequencies to use for any given resolution that it supports.
As I mentioned earlier, I choose to not use 'modelines' at all; eliminate them entirely. I have never had a problem that required a modeline to fix it.
Notice the following code, from the 'Monitor' section of your config file:
Code:
Horizsync 30-81
Vertrefresh 56-75
The above is probably the only relevant information, besides the supported resolutions, that you will find in your monitor user guide/handbook. Make sure that this information is correct, to ensure that the X server does not try to drive the monitor outside of its operating range, thereby possibly damaging it. (This is extremely unlikely with today's new, 'intelligent' monitors-- if given parameters they cannot operate at, they simply turn off, or show a box on the screen telling you that it's out of range, or they change resolutions by themselves. On OLD OLD monitors, and old laptop screens, it was apparently quite easy to burn out the monitor or damage it.)
If you *really* want to use modelines, there are numerous web-based applications (websites) and also small downloadable tools (sometimes included with a distro maybe?) that allow you to plug in resolutions or other parameters, and it will generate a complete modeline for you.
PS - I notice that you are using the nvidia binary driver. As well as the xorg.conf man page, the nvidia driver also includes extensive documentation that is very well worth reading through. It describes all of the MANY options and configurations you can do with nvidia hardware & driver. If you like tangible documentation, you can run the nvidia driver installer with the --extract-only option on the command line, and it will extract itself to a folder (or several folders) into which you can go to read all the documentation included inside the driver.
EDIT: about that driver extraction: on Ubuntu, I believe you have to use the package manager to somehow install the driver, don't you?? If so, I don't know if that method would include the documentation that is usually in the driver archive. If you want, locate the version of the driver that you are using, and go HERE to download the archive so that you have the un-Ubuntu-ized version.
Cheers!
Sasha
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 07-29-2009 at 06:57 PM.
Reason: Added addendum re: nvidia driver
As for the rest - I understand. Thanks for the patience to go into an in-depth explanation.
I will definitely do some more reading on the subject, though I have some other, more pressing issues I intend to research first.
And... Ubuntu is just Debian training school, right?
no worries, you're very welcome for the help, that's why we're all hanging' around here
As for Ubuntu being '.. Debian training school ..' heh heh, I have never heard it put quite that way.. And the answer is probably subjective, depending on how one looks at things. As you seem to know, Ubuntu is of course Debian-based, but the exact similarities and differences I personally cannot explain either way, as it has been several years since I booted an Ubuntu and I have never used a 'pure' debian-type distro for comparison.
Ubuntu is often suggested as an entry-level Linux for newcomers, because it offers many GUI type tools for system configuration, as well as including (or making available) many packages to do just about everything a user coming from Windows might want, the idea being that it makes it easier to experience Linux without the shock-value of a totally alien operating system.
One of the drawbacks to this approach is that the user is somewhat shielded from having to get into the command-line and editing configuration files by hand to get stuff to work, etc.. This can make things easier at first, BUT: you don't learn quite as much about the inner workings, AND: when one of the GUI tools fails, or there IS no GUI tool for a task you need, the Ubuntu user can get stuck, because they then must get their hands dirty fixing something but have no clue where to start. Some users find this 'easiness' boring, and/or too much like Windows..
Another Ubuntu-ism is that many folks find it 'bloated and slow' (Windows again) compared to sleeker Linuxes.
I suspect that a totally Debian distro (read 'Debian' period) is quite different from Ubuntu in its presentation to the user, but things like the file-system layout, component locations, perhaps the package manager etc., would be the same or extremely similar. Again, I can't verify specifics as I am unfamiliar with both.
You strike me as a person who might eventually be interested in learning more about the inner workings of the OS; if that's correct, then you may ultimately be looking at other distros to experiment with (maybe Debian) to get a bit more 'hands-on' with your OS.
LQ's 'distro reviews' page (look in your right-hand menu bar) or a site like distrowatch.com ( or .org, I can never remember its domain ) can give you lots of info about loads of distros, should you be interested in comparing.
Good luck with your more pressing issues! Have fun,
Sasha
PS - I like your username! FWIW I have 6 pet rats, with more on the way
Last edited by GrapefruiTgirl; 07-30-2009 at 07:35 AM.
I am quite limited by my ADHD, but I am trying to go beyond the GUI and the automation.
Will take time.
I want to move to Debian eventually, maybe 'cause it's the most respected distro I personally know of. Also like the idea of a community-developed distro.
This post saved me last night. I switched to a 32" HDTV as a monitor and dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg didn't do anything. xorg-conf stayed empty. I only had access to the command line. Good thing I have used it before. I tried for a few hours to get it working then I found your post and here I am today.
My display is not very good right now. I looked for the horz and vert freq of my monitor on the web last night but no luck. I am using a 32MF337B LCD TV. Very crisp with WinXP but the linux box looks fuzzy and slightly blurred. I'm using a keyboard switch to go between both boxes so the cables are the same.
Is there a program on Debian (sid) that actually sets up the xserver now like dpkg-reconfigure did at one time?
Here's a link by which you can download the PDF Specs for your TV.
It doesn't show a HorizSync rate, but does mention a 60Hz vertical refresh rate for all supported modes.
Since things don't necessarily operate at EXACTLY the specs they're supposed to, I'd use a VertRefresh rate of 50-70 or 55-65, and let the TV settle itself down to exactly what rate it likes. There's a good chance it won't be "exactly" 60.000 Hz. and that's fine.
That's a start -- and now the HorizSync rate. We kinda have to guess, unless you can find it elsewhere on the net. If it were me, I'd use a pretty down-to-earth range of something like 31-86, if I were to have to guess at it.
Now Steve, I see you're using an nVidia card. Good stuff but I don't know w whole lot about that card, like how old or new it is, or how 'powerful', etc.. But, I would like to know what video driver you are using?? Is it the 'nv' driver, that came with your Linux, or one of the other open source drivers? Or is it the nvidia binary driver from This nVidia Driver Download Page?
If it's the binary driver from nvidia, we can be fairly certain that you should be able to get a nice, crispy, sharp image on that TV. Also, the nvidia driver allows you to specify what TV-out modes and format you would like to send to the TV, such as things like 1080i or 780p or whatever those fancy modes are
So, I'm going to have your above post, as well as my post you're reading, removed from this thread, and we'll put them into a thread of their own, rather than hijack this thread.
When you read this, let me know how the situation is currently, and what video driver you're using, and if you need some further help, just ask
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
modelines & Xorg stuff..
heh heh, I have never heard it put quite that way.. And the answer is probably subjective, depending on how one looks at things. As you seem to know, Ubuntu is of course Debian-based, but the exact similarities and differences I personally cannot explain either way, as it has been several years since I booted an Ubuntu and I have never used a 'pure' debian-type distro for comparison.
) can give you lots of info about loads of distros, should you be interested in comparing.
