Merge lp://staging/~gerboland/qtmir/make-up-physical-size-if-mir-says-0x0 into lp://staging/qtmir

Proposed by Gerry Boland
Status: Work in progress
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~gerboland/qtmir/make-up-physical-size-if-mir-says-0x0
Merge into: lp://staging/qtmir
Diff against target: 104 lines (+59/-4)
3 files modified
src/platforms/mirserver/screen.cpp (+20/-4)
tests/framework/fake_displayconfigurationoutput.h (+26/-0)
tests/mirserver/Screen/screen_test.cpp (+13/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~gerboland/qtmir/make-up-physical-size-if-mir-says-0x0
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Daniel van Vugt Abstain
Unity8 CI Bot (community) continuous-integration Approve
Review via email: mp+302575@code.staging.launchpad.net

Commit message

Check if physical display size is zero and if so, guess something more suitable

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Unity8 CI Bot (unity8-ci-bot) wrote :

PASSED: Continuous integration, rev:541
https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/lp-qtmir-ci/337/
Executed test runs:
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build/2532
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-0-fetch/2560
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-1-sourcepkg/release=vivid+overlay/2441
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-1-sourcepkg/release=xenial+overlay/2441
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-1-sourcepkg/release=yakkety/2441
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=vivid+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=vivid+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=xenial+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=xenial+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=yakkety/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=amd64,release=yakkety/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=vivid+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=vivid+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=xenial+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=xenial+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=yakkety/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=armhf,release=yakkety/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=vivid+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=vivid+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=xenial+overlay/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=xenial+overlay/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=yakkety/2434
        deb: https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg/arch=i386,release=yakkety/2434/artifact/output/*zip*/output.zip

Click here to trigger a rebuild:
https://unity8-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/lp-qtmir-ci/337/rebuild

review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

Is it right to make up a physical size?

In the case of a projector, I'm not sure what to do but 0x0mm seems like something we should actually be reporting rather than making something up. So that clients can change their behaviour rather than obliviously appearing with incorrect proportions. Toolkits/apps should deal with it.

As for virtual machines, they have a real physical size... which should be some fraction of the host's display size (same DPI). So that's a bug in the VM.

Overall I think changing 0x0mm into something that's even more misleading is a bad choice.

review: Abstain
Revision history for this message
Gerry Boland (gerboland) wrote :

> Is it right to make up a physical size?

No, but I see other QPA plugins doing it (xcb for example). I had hoped this might help our font rendering issues in some situations.

Unmerged revisions

541. By Gerry Boland

Check if physical display size is zero and if so, guess something suitable

540. By Gerry Boland

Write test to cover expected behaviour when physical display size is 0x0

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches