RandR 1.3 additions?

[Alex Deucher]

On Jan 22, 2008 10:46 AM, Matthias Hopf <mhopf at suse.de> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 08 09:54:41 -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > otherwise it would fall back to the old behavior.  For example, if the
> > driver uses the new encoder stuff, then when a user says turn on VGA-0
> > and turn off TV-1, the server would know they share an encoder and
> > wouldn't turn it off inadvertently rather than making the driver try
> > to do the right thing.  We could initially expose it as an output
> > property, but then add some sort of "official" protocol for it once we
> > sort it out.
>
> I think I pretty much stated that in the properties I proposed.
> It still has the advantage of being backwards compatible.

right, but from the looks of it, they still expose the encoders rather
than the physical connectors.  We shouldn't need
"RANDR_CONNECTOR_NUMBER" or "RANDR_OUTPUT_NUMBER".  We don't want to
expose a DVI-I port as DVI-digital-0 and DVI-analog-0, we want to
expose DVI-I-0.  "RANDR_CONNECTOR_TYPE" and "RANDR_SIGNAL_FORMAT"
could be used as the "standard" properties for choosing an encoder
though.  That said I think in the long run having encoder objects is
clearer.  It's be nice to know that the VGA port and the TV port
shared the same actual encoder rather than just signal format
"analog."

Alex