huge fonts
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
xorg-server (Ubuntu) |
Triaged
|
Medium
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Binary package hint: xorg
After the update I got affected by the symptoms mentioned in https:/
$ xrandr --verbose
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 240, current 1280 x 800, maximum 1280 x 800
default connected 1280x800+0+0 (0x143) normal (normal) 0mm x 0mm
Identifier: 0x142
Timestamp: 29657
Subpixel: unknown
Clones:
CRTC: 0
CRTCs: 0
1280x800 (0x143) 51.2MHz *current
h: width 1280 start 0 end 0 total 1280 skew 0 clock 40.0KHz
v: height 800 start 0 end 0 total 800 clock 50.0Hz
1024x768 (0x144) 40.1MHz
h: width 1024 start 0 end 0 total 1024 skew 0 clock 39.2KHz
v: height 768 start 0 end 0 total 768 clock 51.0Hz
960x540 (0x145) 27.0MHz
h: width 960 start 0 end 0 total 960 skew 0 clock 28.1KHz
v: height 540 start 0 end 0 total 540 clock 52.0Hz
840x525 (0x146) 23.4MHz
h: width 840 start 0 end 0 total 840 skew 0 clock 27.8KHz
v: height 525 start 0 end 0 total 525 clock 53.0Hz
800x600 (0x147) 25.9MHz
h: width 800 start 0 end 0 total 800 skew 0 clock 32.4KHz
v: height 600 start 0 end 0 total 600 clock 54.0Hz
800x512 (0x148) 22.5MHz
h: width 800 start 0 end 0 total 800 skew 0 clock 28.2KHz
v: height 512 start 0 end 0 total 512 clock 55.0Hz
720x450 (0x149) 18.1MHz
h: width 720 start 0 end 0 total 720 skew 0 clock 25.2KHz
v: height 450 start 0 end 0 total 450 clock 56.0Hz
700x525 (0x14a) 20.9MHz
h: width 700 start 0 end 0 total 700 skew 0 clock 29.9KHz
v: height 525 start 0 end 0 total 525 clock 57.0Hz
680x384 (0x14b) 15.1MHz
h: width 680 start 0 end 0 total 680 skew 0 clock 22.3KHz
v: height 384 start 0 end 0 total 384 clock 58.0Hz
680x384 (0x14c) 15.4MHz
h: width 680 start 0 end 0 total 680 skew 0 clock 22.7KHz
v: height 384 start 0 end 0 total 384 clock 59.0Hz
640x512 (0x14d) 19.7MHz
h: width 640 start 0 end 0 total 640 skew 0 clock 30.7KHz
v: height 512 start 0 end 0 total 512 clock 60.0Hz
640x480 (0x14e) 18.7MHz
h: width 640 start 0 end 0 total 640 skew 0 clock 29.3KHz
v: height 480 start 0 end 0 total 480 clock 61.0Hz
640x480 (0x14f) 19.0MHz
h: width 640 start 0 end 0 total 640 skew 0 clock 29.8KHz
v: height 480 start 0 end 0 total 480 clock 62.0Hz
576x432 (0x150) 15.7MHz
h: width 576 start 0 end 0 total 576 skew 0 clock 27.2KHz
v: height 432 start 0 end 0 total 432 clock 63.0Hz
512x384 (0x151) 12.6MHz
h: width 512 start 0 end 0 total 512 skew 0 clock 24.6KHz
v: height 384 start 0 end 0 total 384 clock 64.0Hz
400x300 (0x152) 7.8MHz
h: width 400 start 0 end 0 total 400 skew 0 clock 19.5KHz
v: height 300 start 0 end 0 total 300 clock 65.0Hz
320x240 (0x153) 5.1MHz
h: width 320 start 0 end 0 total 320 skew 0 clock 15.8KHz
v: height 240 start 0 end 0 total 240 clock 66.0Hz
$ get-edid | parse-edid
bash: get-edid: command not found
bash: parse-edid: command not found
$ xdpyinfo | grep dots
resolution: 112x112 dots per inch
ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: amd64
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.04
NonfreeKernelMo
Package: xorg 1:7.4~5ubuntu12
ProcEnviron:
SHELL=/bin/bash
PATH=(custom, no user)
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
ProcVersion: Linux version 2.6.28-6-generic (buildd@crested) (gcc version 4.3.3 (Ubuntu 4.3.3-3ubuntu1) ) #17-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 30 15:35:08 UTC 2009
SourcePackage: xorg
Uname: Linux 2.6.28-6-generic x86_64
[lspci]
00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Mobile PM965/GM965/GL960 Memory Controller Hub [8086:2a00] (rev 03)
Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:8261]
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation GeForce 8400M G [10de:0428] (rev a1) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:8265]
Changed in xorg: | |
status: | Won't Fix → New |
Changed in xorg: | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
status: | New → Triaged |
description: | updated |
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. As this issue has been already identified within the release notes as being a problem this particular report is fairly redundant. I encourage you to search launchpad for the main report for this issue and follow that, this report would end up getting marked as a duplicate of that one anyway.
Thanks,
Richard Seguin