Separate X Screens - possible on Intel Integrated HD Graphics?

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:35:48 -0500

Post by Ken Taylor
Good morning and pardon me if this is a dead end

It is hardly morning but lets go with that.

Post by Ken Taylor
question. I have seen some references to it in the
archives including a couple of responses from Intel folks
saying NO. The most recent was dated 2011 so I am hoping
the answer may have changed.
I have a couple of Dell Inspiron 3050 PCs with "Intel HD
Graphics". The machines have two video outputs
(Displayport and HDMI) and WILL drive two monitors.
However, I have not been able to establish separate X
screens. Here is a little more detailed information about

Why do you want to multiple screens? It is just a headache.
Applications have to be specifically written to support
being moved across screens, and very few are. GIMP and
Emacs are the only programs I know that support this.

Post by Ken Taylor
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Atom
Processor Z36xxx/Z37xxx Series Graphics & Display (rev
0e) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Subsystem: Dell Device 0703
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 91
Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable)
[size=4M] Memory at c0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable)
[size=256M] I/O ports at f080 [size=8]
Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled]
Capabilities: <access denied>
Kernel driver in use: i915
Operating systems include CentOS 7, Ubuntu Mate 15.10 and
Linux Mint Mate 17.3 although I do not think that is a
limitation.
Can someone offer a definitive NO which will put me out
of my misery - I will fill one of the video sockets with
epoxy and never connect two monitors :-) Or a "yes it is
possible" in which case I will continue banging my head
against the problem.
Many thanks,
Ken
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

Pekka Paalanen

2016-01-15 15:53:41 UTC

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:35:48 -0500

Post by Ken Taylor
Good morning and pardon me if this is a dead end question. I have seen
some references to it in the archives including a couple of responses
from Intel folks saying NO. The most recent was dated 2011 so I am
hoping the answer may have changed.
I have a couple of Dell Inspiron 3050 PCs with "Intel HD Graphics". The
machines have two video outputs (Displayport and HDMI) and WILL drive
two monitors. However, I have not been able to establish separate X
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Atom Processor
Z36xxx/Z37xxx Series Graphics & Display (rev 0e) (prog-if 00 [VGA
controller])
Subsystem: Dell Device 0703
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 91
Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4M]
Memory at c0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
I/O ports at f080 [size=8]
Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled]
Capabilities: <access denied>
Kernel driver in use: i915
Operating systems include CentOS 7, Ubuntu Mate 15.10 and Linux Mint
Mate 17.3 although I do not think that is a limitation.
Can someone offer a definitive NO which will put me out of my misery - I
will fill one of the video sockets with epoxy and never connect two
monitors :-) Or a "yes it is possible" in which case I will continue
banging my head against the problem.

Hi,

this might be a bit off-topic for this list, but the feature you are
looking for is called Zaphod. In fact, 'man intel' lists option
"ZaphodHeads" for the DDX, so I assume it's implemented.

Unfortunately I don't have a link to any configuration example at hand,
but in theory you'd configure just like two separate cards in
xorg.conf, except both use the same driver and device and the
difference is what you put in the ZaphodHeads option.

Thanks,
pq

Jasper St. Pierre

2016-01-15 15:56:09 UTC

There are other ways of getting multi-monitor support other than using
two separate X screens. The most recent and modern way is XRandR. So
instead of epoxying your monitor port, or using X screens, you should
try to use XRandR.

Separate X screens are complicated, and is likely not the experience
you want. Desktops like GNOME have not supported that for a long time,
and GTK+ has started to remove support for multi-screen X.

Good morning and pardon me if this is a dead end question. I have seen some
references to it in the archives including a couple of responses from Intel
folks saying NO. The most recent was dated 2011 so I am hoping the answer
may have changed.
I have a couple of Dell Inspiron 3050 PCs with "Intel HD Graphics". The
machines have two video outputs (Displayport and HDMI) and WILL drive two
monitors. However, I have not been able to establish separate X screens.
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Atom Processor
Z36xxx/Z37xxx Series Graphics & Display (rev 0e) (prog-if 00 [VGA
controller])
Subsystem: Dell Device 0703
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 91
Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4M]
Memory at c0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
I/O ports at f080 [size=8]
Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled]
Capabilities: <access denied>
Kernel driver in use: i915
Operating systems include CentOS 7, Ubuntu Mate 15.10 and Linux Mint Mate
17.3 although I do not think that is a limitation.
Can someone offer a definitive NO which will put me out of my misery - I
will fill one of the video sockets with epoxy and never connect two monitors
:-) Or a "yes it is possible" in which case I will continue banging my head
against the problem.
Many thanks,
Ken
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

--
Jasper

Ken Taylor

2016-01-15 22:46:27 UTC

Post by Jasper St. Pierre
There are other ways of getting multi-monitor support other than using
two separate X screens. The most recent and modern way is XRandR. So
instead of epoxying your monitor port, or using X screens, you should
try to use XRandR.

Thanks but I have looked at a lot of documentation for XrandR. I do not
see that XrandR can give me two monitors with distinct desktops.
Changing monitor resolution and position relative to one another can be
accomplished (in Mate or Gnome) with System; Preferences; Hardware;
Monitor. Am I missing some functionality in XrandR?

Post by Jasper St. Pierre
Separate X screens are complicated, and is likely not the experience
you want. Desktops like GNOME have not supported that for a long time,
and GTK+ has started to remove support for multi-screen X.

Separate X screens gives me EXACTLY what I am after. That is why I asked
the question. Please see this page:
http://jsmylinux.no-ip.org/basic-information/dual-monitors/ and have a
look towards the bottom titled "Individual Panels".

Gnome 2 on CentOS 6 works fine as does Mate on CentOS 7 and Ubuntu
15.10. I have not tried Gnome 3 - at least not that I can recall. It is
almost as bad as Ubuntu Unity.

Post by Jasper St. Pierre

Good morning and pardon me if this is a dead end question. I have seen some
references to it in the archives including a couple of responses from Intel
folks saying NO. The most recent was dated 2011 so I am hoping the answer
may have changed.
I have a couple of Dell Inspiron 3050 PCs with "Intel HD Graphics". The
machines have two video outputs (Displayport and HDMI) and WILL drive two
monitors. However, I have not been able to establish separate X screens.
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Atom Processor
Z36xxx/Z37xxx Series Graphics & Display (rev 0e) (prog-if 00 [VGA
controller])
Subsystem: Dell Device 0703
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 91
Memory at d0000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4M]
Memory at c0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
I/O ports at f080 [size=8]
Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled]
Capabilities: <access denied>
Kernel driver in use: i915
Operating systems include CentOS 7, Ubuntu Mate 15.10 and Linux Mint Mate
17.3 although I do not think that is a limitation.
Can someone offer a definitive NO which will put me out of my misery - I
will fill one of the video sockets with epoxy and never connect two monitors
:-) Or a "yes it is possible" in which case I will continue banging my head
against the problem.
Many thanks,
Ken
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

Michal Suchanek

2016-01-16 17:21:46 UTC

Thanks but I have looked at a lot of documentation for XrandR. I do not see
that XrandR can give me two monitors with distinct desktops. Changing
monitor resolution and position relative to one another can be accomplished
(in Mate or Gnome) with System; Preferences; Hardware; Monitor. Am I missing
some functionality in XrandR?

Separate X screens gives me EXACTLY what I am after. That is why I asked the
http://jsmylinux.no-ip.org/basic-information/dual-monitors/ and have a look
towards the bottom titled "Individual Panels".
Gnome 2 on CentOS 6 works fine as does Mate on CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 15.10. I
have not tried Gnome 3 - at least not that I can recall. It is almost as bad
as Ubuntu Unity.

And that 's single screen with multiple outputs.

It gives you no productivity when you have two screens and the
applications on one screen cannot be moved to the other and probably
cannot even share paste buffers.

And yes, the gnome system settings use xrandr so give you exactly the
same options.

What is missing functionality in the system preferences?

Or are you missing extra panels that were not automagically created
when you plugged in another monitor?

You can create more panels by hand in the panel settings.

HTH

Michal

Ken Taylor

2016-01-16 17:52:29 UTC

Post by Michal Suchanek

Thanks but I have looked at a lot of documentation for XrandR. I do not see
that XrandR can give me two monitors with distinct desktops. Changing
monitor resolution and position relative to one another can be accomplished
(in Mate or Gnome) with System; Preferences; Hardware; Monitor. Am I missing
some functionality in XrandR?

And that 's single screen with multiple outputs.
It gives you no productivity when you have two screens and the
applications on one screen cannot be moved to the other and probably
cannot even share paste buffers.
And yes, the gnome system settings use xrandr so give you exactly the
same options.
What is missing functionality in the system preferences?
Or are you missing extra panels that were not automagically created
when you plugged in another monitor?
You can create more panels by hand in the panel settings.
HTH
Michal

I do not need to be able to move open applications from one screen
(monitor) to the other. I start them on the screen (monitor) where I
wish to use them. And YES I can copy/paste data from an application on
one monitor to an application on the other - I do this all the time. I
routinely copy data from an application on one monitor on the host to a
virtual machine running on the other monitor.

When I first created my separate X screens the second monitor did not
have panels. I created them and added the launchers for the applications
which I intended to run on that monitor.

System; Preferences; Hardware; Display does NOT provide a way to
configure the monitors in away to accomplish these things (Ubuntu 9.10,
10.04, 15.04, CentOS 7, CentOS 7).

I appreciate all of the input folks are providing. However, I asked the
simple question if separate X screens could be configured on Intel
integrated graphics. The discussion seems to have degenerated into "you
don't want to do" what I wish to do and "you should try something else."

PLEASE if someone knows the answer YES or NO - tell me. If the answer is
no I will reserve the Intel graphics machines for single monitor or
headless use and use my Nvidia machines for dual hear use.

Ken

Boudhayan Gupta

2016-01-16 18:31:49 UTC

Hi Ken and all,

Post by Ken Taylor
I appreciate all of the input folks are providing. However, I asked the
simple question if separate X screens could be configured on Intel
integrated graphics. The discussion seems to have degenerated into "you
don't want to do" what I wish to do and "you should try something else."

There are legitimate use cases for this. I suspect Ken wants to do
something like running a completely different X session on a second
monitor.

What you're looking for is Zaphod mode. There *is* a configuration
option for this, but I have no idea whether the code paths are bug
free or even implemented.

An example for using Zaphod mode with nouveau is here at
http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/MultiMonitorDesktop/. The same
configuration tweaked for the intel driver should work.

-- Boudhayan

Ken Taylor

2016-01-16 20:32:49 UTC

Post by Boudhayan Gupta
Hi Ken and all,

There are legitimate use cases for this. I suspect Ken wants to do
something like running a completely different X session on a second
monitor.
What you're looking for is Zaphod mode. There *is* a configuration
option for this, but I have no idea whether the code paths are bug
free or even implemented.
An example for using Zaphod mode with nouveau is here at
http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/MultiMonitorDesktop/. The same
configuration tweaked for the intel driver should work.
-- Boudhayan

Thanks Boudhayan,

I had come across Zaphod a few times but had not yet made sense of it.
The example you point to may give me a starting point. The only
parameters I cannot figure out are the "Actual connector" values. I
have the possibilities:

DP-1
DP-2
HDMI-A-1
HDMI-A-2

I have a monitor plugged into the DisplayPort connection and one into
the HDMI connection. I suppose I could guess that they are both #1. I
will try that and see if it lets the smoke out :-)

Ken

Ken Taylor

2016-01-16 22:18:05 UTC

Post by Boudhayan Gupta
Hi Ken and all,

There are legitimate use cases for this. I suspect Ken wants to do
something like running a completely different X session on a second
monitor.
What you're looking for is Zaphod mode. There *is* a configuration
option for this, but I have no idea whether the code paths are bug
free or even implemented.
An example for using Zaphod mode with nouveau is here at
http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/MultiMonitorDesktop/. The same
configuration tweaked for the intel driver should work.
-- Boudhayan

I took the example xorg.conf in the link you provided and made these
changes:

Changed Driver to "intel" from "nouveau"
Changed the BusID to "PCI:0:2.0" as obtained from lspci
Set the actual connectors:
Option "ZaphodHeads" "DP-1"
Option "ZaphodHeads" "HDMI-A-1"

Unfortunately this did not bring up an X display. Here are the errors I
observed in Xorg.0.log

[ 87.163] (II) intel(0): Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915,
version 1.6.0 20150327
[ 87.163] (EE) Screen 0 deleted because of no matching config section.
[ 87.163] (II) UnloadModule: "intel"
[ 87.163] (EE) Device(s) detected, but none match those in the config
file.
[ 87.163] (EE)
Fatal server error:
[ 87.163] (EE) no screens found(EE)
[ 87.163] (EE)
Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support
at http://wiki.x.org
for help.
[ 87.163] (EE) Please also check the log file at
"/var/log/Xorg.0.log" for additional information.
[ 87.163] (EE)
[ 87.170] (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file.

I thought that the stub in the example would have been enough to at
least light the monitor:

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Device0"
EndSection

I guess I need to dig through my other examples and see if I can find
some more meat to put in the section.

Ken

Michal Suchanek

2016-01-17 13:10:38 UTC

Post by Boudhayan Gupta
Hi Ken and all,

The usual pattern is that people ask about multiple screens but do not
really want them. Having multiple screens only limits what you can do
and gives you no meaningful benefits.

Post by Boudhayan Gupta
There are legitimate use cases for this. I suspect Ken wants to do
something like running a completely different X session on a second
monitor.
What you're looking for is Zaphod mode. There *is* a configuration
option for this, but I have no idea whether the code paths are bug
free or even implemented.
An example for using Zaphod mode with nouveau is here at
http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/MultiMonitorDesktop/. The same
configuration tweaked for the intel driver should work.
-- Boudhayan

I took the example xorg.conf in the link you provided and made these
Changed Driver to "intel" from "nouveau"
Changed the BusID to "PCI:0:2.0" as obtained from lspci
Option "ZaphodHeads" "DP-1"
Option "ZaphodHeads" "HDMI-A-1"

You should probably check with xrandr what outputs you have. The
output names vary between different drivers.

Also you should look at the /var/log/Xorg.0.log for full X server output.

HTH

Michal

r***@gmail.com

2016-01-17 15:05:52 UTC

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

Ken Taylor

2016-01-17 16:49:42 UTC

Post by Michal Suchanek
The usual pattern is that people ask about multiple screens but do not
really want them. Having multiple screens only limits what you can do
and gives you no meaningful benefits.

On my previous system (which I used for about 5 years) I used multiple screens
(driven by an NVidia card) to great benefit. My current system (started using
about 6 months ago) has a 32" monitor so I no longer feel the need for
multiple screens.
On some of the industrial (process control) systems I've been responsible for,
we put up to 4 monitors (with different displays) driven by one computer in
front of a single operator.
I have to admit that the Linux / X window (and successor) terminology
confurses me--when I say multiple screens, I mean multiple monitors driven by
a single PC and different content on each, and, ideally (but not always the
case) the ability to move content between displays and copy and paste to and
from each.
To say that nobody can get any meaningful benefits from multiple screens (or
from anything else) implies a degree of omniscience (sp?) that I'm not sure
you have.
I probably should have written this and filed it in my drafts folder, but
sometimes I don't do what is best for myself. ;-)
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

Thanks rhkramer,

I appreciate the vote of confidence. Perhaps "separate X screens" is
something which only a small percentage of user are multi-tasking enough
to take advantage of. However, I am one of them. I do appreciate
assistance and suggestions from other users as to how to accomplish what
I am working on. I do not necessarily appreciate being told I do not
want to do what I want to do.

As to a HUGE monitor... I had thought about that. I could run 4 virtual
machines each taking up 1/4 of the display. But I just purchases two
nice Dell 24" Ultrasharp 19:10 aspect ratio monitors. The left one is
vertical and the right one horizontal. The vertical one is usually
divided in half - Thunderbird on the top half and a virtual machine
connected to my secure email at protonmail.ch on the bottom. I call up
Firefox when I need it over top of the two or I may switch to another
workspace first. On the right monitor I often have several things going
on 3 or 4 workspaces.

Ken

Keith Packard

2016-01-18 05:01:17 UTC

Post by Ken Taylor
I appreciate the vote of confidence. Perhaps "separate X screens" is
something which only a small percentage of user are multi-tasking enough
to take advantage of.

As you know, in X, a "screen" is a pretty central abstraction, with
Windows, Pixmaps and other graphics resources all specified in relation
to a single "screen". You can't mix-n-match resources between screens,
leading to the inability to move windows between them.

Over the years, we've substituted that with a similar notion which
offers functionality more similar to other window systems, the 'one
screen, many monitors' plan as first implemented in PanoramiX (now
Xinerama) and then RandR.

Here's the differences I can think of between the 'one screen, many
monitors' and 'many screens, one monitor each' configurations. If you've
got others, I'd love to hear them.

One screen, many monitors (Xinerama/RandR):

* Move windows among monitors freely
* Add/remove monitors on the fly

Many screens, one monitor each (core X):

* Specify which monitor an application will appear on via the
command line (or environment variable).

In both:

* Resize monitors on the fly
* Configure the desktop on each monitor separately
* Specify the initial monitor setup in config files.

As far as video driver support, the internal server support for multiple
"screens" on a single graphics device is twisty, and very few people
ever bother to test these setups. It's possible that it will be broken
on your favorite card at some point.

You can probably understand that supporting both of these models is
extra work for all of the developers, and it would be nice if we could
make a single model work for most people.

--
-keith

Michal Suchanek

2016-01-18 05:06:55 UTC

Post by Ken Taylor
Thanks rhkramer,
I appreciate the vote of confidence. Perhaps "separate X screens" is
something which only a small percentage of user are multi-tasking enough to
take advantage of. However, I am one of them. I do appreciate assistance and
suggestions from other users as to how to accomplish what I am working on.
I do not necessarily appreciate being told I do not want to do what I want
to do.
As to a HUGE monitor... I had thought about that. I could run 4 virtual
machines each taking up 1/4 of the display. But I just purchases two nice
Dell 24" Ultrasharp 19:10 aspect ratio monitors. The left one is vertical
and the right one horizontal. The vertical one is usually divided in half -
Thunderbird on the top half and a virtual machine connected to my secure
email at protonmail.ch on the bottom. I call up Firefox when I need it over
top of the two or I may switch to another workspace first. On the right
monitor I often have several things going on 3 or 4 workspaces.

Well, I use multiple monitors with single X screen in pretty much the
same way - except I can put any of the virtual desktops on any of the
monitors.

Since you have one portrait and one landscape monitor moving the
virtual desktops between the two will probably not be flawless. Still
that does not mean you need to configure the X server in such a way it
is impossible - you can just not do it.

As has been pointed out the Zaphod options should give you multiple X
screens but since next to nobody uses these there may be issues. In
fact, the very article you linked lists multiple issues when using
multiple monitors with separate screens.

Thanks

Michal

Ken Taylor

2016-01-18 11:38:07 UTC

Post by Michal Suchanek

Well, I use multiple monitors with single X screen in pretty much the
same way - except I can put any of the virtual desktops on any of the
monitors.
Since you have one portrait and one landscape monitor moving the
virtual desktops between the two will probably not be flawless. Still
that does not mean you need to configure the X server in such a way it
is impossible - you can just not do it.
As has been pointed out the Zaphod options should give you multiple X
screens but since next to nobody uses these there may be issues. In
fact, the very article you linked lists multiple issues when using
multiple monitors with separate screens.
Thanks
Michal

I guess I will just stick with Nvidia cards and ignore the Intel graphics

Felix Miata

2016-01-18 06:39:04 UTC

Post by Ken Taylor
Ultrasharp 19:10 aspect ratio

Typo, right? If not, what's the model number?

--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/

Ken Taylor

2016-01-18 11:36:51 UTC

Post by Felix Miata

Post by Ken Taylor
Ultrasharp 19:10 aspect ratio

Typo, right? If not, what's the model number?

No typo. U2414 - look it up. What does this have to do with the original
question about Intel graphics?

Felix Miata

2016-01-18 15:25:30 UTC

Post by Felix Miata

Post by Ken Taylor
Ultrasharp 19:10 aspect ratio

Typo, right? If not, what's the model number?

No typo. U2414 - look it up.

I tried looking it up first. I found only U2414H, a 23.8" 16:9, to be as
close as I could find. Most widescreen Dells I've ever seen are either 16:9
(1.778/1=HDTV), 21:9 (2.333/1) or 16:10 (1.600/1=PC), with the vast majority
being 16:9. 19:10 (1.900/1) would be news to me.

Post by Ken Taylor
What does this have to do with the original question about Intel graphics?

Not a thing, only intrigued that Dell instead of Samsung or Apple might be
first to offer yet another aspect ratio.

Simon McVittie

2016-01-18 14:29:50 UTC

On some of the industrial (process control) systems I've been
responsible for,
we put up to 4 monitors (with different displays) driven by one computer in
front of a single operator.

Multiple heads/outputs/monitors do not have to imply multiple X11
'screens'. They can, but they don't have to, and it's very rare to
prefer multiple screens.

'Screen' is a jargon term in this context, like 'display' - I'm putting
it in quotes to be unambiguous. If all your applications run with
DISPLAY=:0, or equivalently DISPLAY=:0.0, you have one X11 'screen',
potentially outputting to multiple monitors. If some of your
applications run with DISPLAY=:0.1 and are permanently tied to a
different set of monitors (probably a set of size 1), *that* is a second
X11 'screen'.

If you have multiple LCD/CRT/whatever monitors on one desk, or a laptop
and a monitor, or a laptop and a projector, the option that is usually
preferred is a single X11 'screen' spanning multiple monitors, with
optional runtime switching between mirroring (same content on each
output) and non-mirroring (different content on each output). That's
what Xrandr normally does on modern systems, and as far as I'm aware,
what all current desktop environments optimize for. It's also the X11
equivalent of all the supported arrangements in Windows and OS X.

For instance, on the laptop where I'm typing this (with Intel HD
graphics, as it happens), here's what my output looks like:

|----------|
| monitor ||--------|
| || laptop |
|----------||--------|

DISPLAY :0 --- screen :0.0 /-- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- LVDS1 --- laptop

The equivalent with multiple 'screens':

DISPLAY :0 /-- screen :0.0 --- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- screen :0.1 --- LVDS1 --- laptop

would mean I wouldn't be able to drag windows to and from the laptop, or
copy and paste between the two screens, and I don't have enough
historical X11 knowledge to know whether I'd need a second keyboard and
mouse for that setup.

Post by r***@gmail.com
I have to admit that the Linux / X window (and successor) terminology
confurses me--when I say multiple screens, I mean multiple monitors driven by
a single PC and different content on each, and, ideally (but not always the
case) the ability to move content between displays and copy and paste to and
from each.

It sounds as though rhkramer may be one of the people Michal is thinking
of, who has been confused by the unfortunate historical terminology,
does want multiple monitors, but does not necessarily want multiple of
the historical X11 construct whose jargon term is 'screen'.

Post by Ken Taylor
I appreciate the vote of confidence. Perhaps "separate X screens" is
something which only a small percentage of user are multi-tasking enough
to take advantage of. However, I am one of them.

From other emails, it sounds as though you (for disambiguation: Ken) are
one of the minority that genuinely does want multiple X11 'screens',
with no copy/paste between them, and no ability to move windows between
them. I'm not sure how this actually improves your experience when
multi-tasking when compared with a Xrandr-style large 'screen' spanning
multiple monitors, but "you asked for it/you got it"[1].

However, this is a sufficiently small minority that it seems reasonable
to ask "are you *sure* this is really what you're looking for?" when
someone asks for it, because it's fairly common for people who are
confused by the terminology to think they want multiple (jargon)
'screens' for their multiple (non-jargon) screens, even though that
leads to reduced functionality.

If your goal is to have immovable displays appearing on particular
monitors, that's also possible to achieve within a single 'screen' by
modifying or configuring a window manager or compositor to place windows
where you want them. (For instance, tiling window managers like
Awesome[2] tend to support this sort of thing.)

--
Simon McVittie
Collabora Ltd. <http://www.collabora.com/>

[1] the lesser-known opposite of WYSIWYG
[2] http://awesome.naquadah.org/wiki/Using_Multiple_Screens

Ken Taylor

2016-01-18 15:28:21 UTC

Post by Simon McVittie

On some of the industrial (process control) systems I've been responsible for,
we put up to 4 monitors (with different displays) driven by one computer in
front of a single operator.

Multiple heads/outputs/monitors do not have to imply multiple X11
'screens'. They can, but they don't have to, and it's very rare to
prefer multiple screens.
'Screen' is a jargon term in this context, like 'display' - I'm putting
it in quotes to be unambiguous. If all your applications run with
DISPLAY=:0, or equivalently DISPLAY=:0.0, you have one X11 'screen',
potentially outputting to multiple monitors. If some of your
applications run with DISPLAY=:0.1 and are permanently tied to a
different set of monitors (probably a set of size 1), *that* is a second
X11 'screen'.
If you have multiple LCD/CRT/whatever monitors on one desk, or a laptop
and a monitor, or a laptop and a projector, the option that is usually
preferred is a single X11 'screen' spanning multiple monitors, with
optional runtime switching between mirroring (same content on each
output) and non-mirroring (different content on each output). That's
what Xrandr normally does on modern systems, and as far as I'm aware,
what all current desktop environments optimize for. It's also the X11
equivalent of all the supported arrangements in Windows and OS X.
For instance, on the laptop where I'm typing this (with Intel HD
|----------|
| monitor ||--------|
| || laptop |
|----------||--------|
DISPLAY :0 --- screen :0.0 /-- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- LVDS1 --- laptop
DISPLAY :0 /-- screen :0.0 --- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- screen :0.1 --- LVDS1 --- laptop
would mean I wouldn't be able to drag windows to and from the laptop, or
copy and paste between the two screens, and I don't have enough
historical X11 knowledge to know whether I'd need a second keyboard and
mouse for that setup.

From other emails, it sounds as though you (for disambiguation: Ken) are
one of the minority that genuinely does want multiple X11 'screens',
with no copy/paste between them, and no ability to move windows between
them. I'm not sure how this actually improves your experience when
multi-tasking when compared with a Xrandr-style large 'screen' spanning
multiple monitors, but "you asked for it/you got it"[1].
However, this is a sufficiently small minority that it seems reasonable
to ask "are you *sure* this is really what you're looking for?" when
someone asks for it, because it's fairly common for people who are
confused by the terminology to think they want multiple (jargon)
'screens' for their multiple (non-jargon) screens, even though that
leads to reduced functionality.
If your goal is to have immovable displays appearing on particular
monitors, that's also possible to achieve within a single 'screen' by
modifying or configuring a window manager or compositor to place windows
where you want them. (For instance, tiling window managers like
Awesome[2] tend to support this sort of thing.)

Thanks Simon,

I don't think this is really as complicated as you make it appear. If
you will look at the last option on this page
http://jsmylinux.no-ip.org/basic-information/dual-monitors/ titled
"Individual Panels" that is what I setup on my Nvidia card when I first
got the PC and two monitors in 2009 (Ubuntu 9.10). In 2010 I switched to
CentOS 6 due to an issue with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I have been running
CentOS 6 ever since. CentOS 6 uses Gnome 2 (this works with Mate on
CentOS 7 as well) and the tweaking involved:

1 - Setup separate X screens as shown on the referenced page using
nvidia-config.

2 - The only anomaly I found with Gnome 2 (same with Mate) is that the
icons on the Gnome panels on the left monitor (screen0) were
duplicated. This is easy to resolve. Delete and add back each
launcher, menu or whatever to the panel. The issue never re-occurred in
5 years.

3 - Create two new panels at the top and bottom of the right monitor
(screen1). Add the desired menus, launchers etc. to these panels.

4 - Enjoy!

I can NOT drag a window between monitors - True.

I CAN copy/paste text, files, etc. from an application on one monitor to
an application on the other monitor.

I can run multiple instances of most applications independently by
simply selecting the launcher from the panel on the monitor on which I
wish to see the application. For example I have my "normal" Firefox
profile called by the launcher on the left monitor. As part of my
nightly data backup process I make a copy of this profile. The Firefox
launcher on the right monitor calls the backup profile - thus I have all
but the latest bookmarks etc. available on the right monitor (some
privacy benefits as well but that is beyond the scope of this discussion).

My left monitor - pivoted vertical - usually has Thunderbird running in
the top half and a VMWare virtual machine running in the bottom half. I
use this to run a specially configured copy of Firefox to access secure
email on protonmail.ch. At the moment I have Firefox running on the
host and accessing the above referenced page - it is showing in the
lower half of the screen - under Thunderbird and I can scroll it without
loosing focus from Thunderbird.

I have a bash terminal and vinagre (remote desktop viewer) on the first
workspace of the right monitor - connected to a Mint Mate machine which
I am configuring. workspace 2 is running another virtual machine,
workspace is running vlc so I can play some music as I work - do not
want to be tripping over vlc and Nautilus pointed to my music library
when Alt-Tab-ing between windows on the first workspace. And I am not
doing much right now.

Bottom line... I setup the separate X screens when I first was able to
connect two monitors. I have gotten used to the feature and have
adapted my work processes to it. Can I do it on Intel graphics? was just
an experiment as I had the little micro PCs with two video outputs.

Time to take a break - my step-son just called. I have to go fix some
sort of malware issue on his Windoze PC :-)

Ken

Simon Lees

2016-01-18 20:55:38 UTC

Post by Simon McVittie

On some of the industrial (process control) systems I've been responsible for,
we put up to 4 monitors (with different displays) driven by one computer in
front of a single operator.

Multiple heads/outputs/monitors do not have to imply multiple X11
'screens'. They can, but they don't have to, and it's very rare to
prefer multiple screens.
'Screen' is a jargon term in this context, like 'display' - I'm putting
it in quotes to be unambiguous. If all your applications run with
DISPLAY=:0, or equivalently DISPLAY=:0.0, you have one X11 'screen',
potentially outputting to multiple monitors. If some of your
applications run with DISPLAY=:0.1 and are permanently tied to a
different set of monitors (probably a set of size 1), *that* is a second
X11 'screen'.
If you have multiple LCD/CRT/whatever monitors on one desk, or a laptop
and a monitor, or a laptop and a projector, the option that is usually
preferred is a single X11 'screen' spanning multiple monitors, with
optional runtime switching between mirroring (same content on each
output) and non-mirroring (different content on each output). That's
what Xrandr normally does on modern systems, and as far as I'm aware,
what all current desktop environments optimize for. It's also the X11
equivalent of all the supported arrangements in Windows and OS X.
For instance, on the laptop where I'm typing this (with Intel HD
|----------|
| monitor ||--------|
| || laptop |
|----------||--------|
DISPLAY :0 --- screen :0.0 /-- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- LVDS1 --- laptop
DISPLAY :0 /-- screen :0.0 --- HDMI2 --- monitor
\-- screen :0.1 --- LVDS1 --- laptop
would mean I wouldn't be able to drag windows to and from the laptop, or
copy and paste between the two screens, and I don't have enough
historical X11 knowledge to know whether I'd need a second keyboard and
mouse for that setup.

I used to do this with gnome 2 using nvidia's --separate-x-screen
option, it didn't require a second keyboard and mouse. The reason I used
to do this is so that I could change virtual desktops / workspaces
independently per screen, ie screen 1 was on virtual desktop 3 and
screen 2 was on virtual desktop 4, I could then change screen 2 to be on
virtual desktop 1 without effecting screen 1. I found this more useful
then being able to drag windows between screens. Unfortunately modern
DE's often don't support this well as it involves running two instances
of the display manager at the same time. In my case I found that
enlightenment has this behavior without running separate x screens so I
use that instead now.

Cheers
Simon

r***@gmail.com

2016-01-19 01:24:00 UTC

I just came across an article on Linux Journal that mentions a program named
x2x which might be helpful. The mention of x2x is on the third page of the
article, and I've included one quotation:

Build a Large-Screen Command Center with
the RPi 2

http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/build-large-screen-command-center-
rpi-2?page=0,2&utm_source=phplist11&utm_medium=email&utm_content=text&utm_campaign=LinuxCounter%20Newsletter%202016%2F01

I guess I could mention that the article deals with two (large) monitors
driven by separate Raspberry Pis runniing, essentially, Debian (Raspian)--now
read the quote above.

<quote>
With x2x, you can move the mouse (and keyboard focus) from one RPi to the
other, one monitor to the other, as though the screens were attached to a
single computer. It's fast and seamless.
</quote>

I've just barely skimmed the article, so I make no promises / endorsements--
just something that might be helpful.

Post by Simon Lees
I used to do this with gnome 2 using nvidia's --separate-x-screen
option, it didn't require a second keyboard and mouse. The reason I used
to do this is so that I could change virtual desktops / workspaces
independently per screen, ie screen 1 was on virtual desktop 3 and
screen 2 was on virtual desktop 4, I could then change screen 2 to be on
virtual desktop 1 without effecting screen 1. I found this more useful
then being able to drag windows between screens. Unfortunately modern
DE's often don't support this well as it involves running two instances
of the display manager at the same time. In my case I found that
enlightenment has this behavior without running separate x screens so I
use that instead now.

r***@gmail.com

2016-01-19 14:42:05 UTC

Post by r***@gmail.com
I just came across an article on Linux Journal that mentions a program
named x2x which might be helpful. The mention of x2x is on the third page
Build a Large-Screen Command Center with
the RPi 2
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/build-large-screen-command-center-
rpi-2?page=0,2&utm_source=phplist11&utm_medium=email&utm_content=text&utm_c
ampaign=LinuxCounter%20Newsletter%202016%2F01
I guess I could mention that the article deals with two (large) monitors
driven by separate Raspberry Pis runniing, essentially, Debian
(Raspian)--now read the quote above.

---------------------------------------------------^below (I should proofread
again after editing ;-)

Post by r***@gmail.com
<quote>
With x2x, you can move the mouse (and keyboard focus) from one RPi to the
other, one monitor to the other, as though the screens were attached to a
single computer. It's fast and seamless.
</quote>
I've just barely skimmed the article, so I make no promises /
endorsements-- just something that might be helpful.

r***@gmail.com

2016-01-18 15:25:42 UTC

You're welcome!

Post by Ken Taylor
Thanks rhkramer,

Felix Miata

2016-01-16 18:50:45 UTC

[why here and not the intel-gfx mailing list?].....

Post by Ken Taylor
I do not need to be able to move open applications from one screen
(monitor) to the other. I start them on the screen (monitor) where I
wish to use them. And YES I can copy/paste data from an application on
one monitor to an application on the other - I do this all the time. I
routinely copy data from an application on one monitor on the host to a
virtual machine running on the other monitor.
When I first created my separate X screens the second monitor did not
have panels. I created them and added the launchers for the applications
which I intended to run on that monitor.
System; Preferences; Hardware; Display does NOT provide a way to
configure the monitors in away to accomplish these things (Ubuntu 9.10,
10.04, 15.04, CentOS 7, CentOS 7).
I appreciate all of the input folks are providing. However, I asked the
simple question if separate X screens could be configured on Intel
integrated graphics. The discussion seems to have degenerated into "you
don't want to do" what I wish to do and "you should try something else."
PLEASE if someone knows the answer YES or NO - tell me. If the answer is
no I will reserve the Intel graphics machines for single monitor or
headless use and use my Nvidia machines for dual hear use.

What you're asking has had me puzzled from the start. On multiple Intel video
output systems I have, as old as a SFF Dell Optiplex 780 with DisplayPort and
VGA and as new as Haswell with VGA, DVI and HDMI, either mirrored or extended
desktop configurations were no easier or harder to to with xorg.conf or xrandr
than with nouveau or radeon drivers. So, I don't get what the driver could
have to do with the "Individual Panels" you want (and I don't grok).

e.g.
#xrandr --dpi 108 --output DP1 --mode 1680x1050 --right-of VGA1 --output VGA1 --mode 1600x1200 # intel dual

is currently provding the following for Trinity Desktop on my Dell:
gx780:~ $ grep 'using VT' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.108] (--) using VT number 7
gx780:~ $ lspci | grep VGA
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
gx780:~ $ grep chipsets /var/log/Xorg.0.log | egrep -v 'VESA|FBDEV'
gx780:~ $ grep PRETTY /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="openSUSE 13.2 (Harlequin) (x86_64)"
gx780:~ $ grep 'X.Org X Server' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
X.Org X Server 1.16.1
gx780:~ $ grep 'Current Operating System' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.062] Current Operating System: Linux gx780 3.16.6-2-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Oct 20 13:47:22 UTC 2014 (feb42ea) x86_64
gx780:~ $ grep 'Kernel Command Line' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.062] Kernel command line: root=LABEL=17os13264 ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 noresume splash=0 vga=791 video=***@60 3
gx780:~ $ grep Output /var/log/Xorg.0.log | egrep -v 'disconnec|no monit' | grep -v 'nitor sect'
[ 431.112] (--) intel(0): Output VGA1 using initial mode 1024x768 on pipe 0
[ 431.112] (--) intel(0): Output DP1 using initial mode 1024x768 on pipe 1
gx780:~ $ egrep -i "physical size|cm]" /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.161] (II) intel(0): Setting screen physical size to 270 x 203
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/50-monitor.conf | grep DisplaySize
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf | grep DisplaySize
grep: /etc/X11/xorg.conf: No such file or directory
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/50-monitor.conf | grep PreferredMode
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf | grep PreferredMode
grep: /etc/X11/xorg.conf: No such file or directory
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrd.d/setup | grep xrandr
xrandr --dpi 108 --output DP1 --mode 1680x1050 --right-of VGA1 --output VGA1 --mode 1600x1200 # intel dual
gx780:~ $ xrdb -query | grep dpi
gx780:~ $ xrandr | egrep 'onnect|creen|\*' | grep -v disconn | sort -r
VGA1 connected 1600x1200+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 388mm x 291mm
Screen 0: minimum 8 x 8, current 3280 x 1200, maximum 32767 x 32767
DP1 connected 1680x1050+1600+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 474mm x 296mm
1680x1050 59.97*+ 74.89
1600x1200 85.00* 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00
gx780:~ $ xdpyinfo | egrep 'dimen|ution'
dimensions: 3280x1200 pixels (771x282 millimeters)
resolution: 108x108 dots per inch

Could it be there is some limitation exclusive to Atom causing your frustration?

Ken Taylor

2016-01-16 20:27:10 UTC

Because A) I saw mention of the issue in the archives of THIS list and
B) I was not aware of the referenced list. I will check over there. Thanks!

Post by Felix Miata
[why here and not the intel-gfx mailing list?].....

What you're asking has had me puzzled from the start. On multiple Intel video
output systems I have, as old as a SFF Dell Optiplex 780 with DisplayPort and
VGA and as new as Haswell with VGA, DVI and HDMI, either mirrored or extended
desktop configurations were no easier or harder to to with xorg.conf or xrandr
than with nouveau or radeon drivers. So, I don't get what the driver could
have to do with the "Individual Panels" you want (and I don't grok).
e.g.
#xrandr --dpi 108 --output DP1 --mode 1680x1050 --right-of VGA1 --output VGA1 --mode 1600x1200 # intel dual
gx780:~ $ grep 'using VT' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.108] (--) using VT number 7
gx780:~ $ lspci | grep VGA
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
gx780:~ $ grep chipsets /var/log/Xorg.0.log | egrep -v 'VESA|FBDEV'
gx780:~ $ grep PRETTY /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="openSUSE 13.2 (Harlequin) (x86_64)"
gx780:~ $ grep 'X.Org X Server' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
X.Org X Server 1.16.1
gx780:~ $ grep 'Current Operating System' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.062] Current Operating System: Linux gx780 3.16.6-2-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Oct 20 13:47:22 UTC 2014 (feb42ea) x86_64
gx780:~ $ grep 'Kernel Command Line' /var/log/Xorg.0.log
gx780:~ $ grep Output /var/log/Xorg.0.log | egrep -v 'disconnec|no monit' | grep -v 'nitor sect'
[ 431.112] (--) intel(0): Output VGA1 using initial mode 1024x768 on pipe 0
[ 431.112] (--) intel(0): Output DP1 using initial mode 1024x768 on pipe 1
gx780:~ $ egrep -i "physical size|cm]" /var/log/Xorg.0.log
[ 431.161] (II) intel(0): Setting screen physical size to 270 x 203
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/50-monitor.conf | grep DisplaySize
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf | grep DisplaySize
grep: /etc/X11/xorg.conf: No such file or directory
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/50-monitor.conf | grep PreferredMode
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xorg.conf | grep PreferredMode
grep: /etc/X11/xorg.conf: No such file or directory
gx780:~ $ grep -v ^\# /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrd.d/setup | grep xrandr
xrandr --dpi 108 --output DP1 --mode 1680x1050 --right-of VGA1 --output VGA1 --mode 1600x1200 # intel dual
gx780:~ $ xrdb -query | grep dpi
gx780:~ $ xrandr | egrep 'onnect|creen|\*' | grep -v disconn | sort -r
VGA1 connected 1600x1200+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 388mm x 291mm
Screen 0: minimum 8 x 8, current 3280 x 1200, maximum 32767 x 32767
DP1 connected 1680x1050+1600+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 474mm x 296mm
1680x1050 59.97*+ 74.89
1600x1200 85.00* 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00
gx780:~ $ xdpyinfo | egrep 'dimen|ution'
dimensions: 3280x1200 pixels (771x282 millimeters)
resolution: 108x108 dots per inch
Could it be there is some limitation exclusive to Atom causing your frustration?

Liam R. E. Quin

2016-01-17 23:25:03 UTC

Post by Ken Taylor
Separate X screens gives me EXACTLY what I am after. That is why I
asked the question. Please see this page:
http://jsmylinux.no-ip.org/basic-information/dual-monitors/ and have
a
look towards the bottom titled "Individual Panels".

It seems to me a reasonable thing to want. I used to use a similar
setup years ago on Sun hardware. But as far as I can tell the driver
for the Intel integrated graphics doesn't support multiple X screens in
that way. The NVidia driver does, but (of course) only for an NVidia
graphics card. On the other hand,
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/XineramaHowTo
has a configuration using xinerama and an intel card, so it may depend
on the exact card you have (and I think in that case they're trying to
get to a single desktop with multiple monitors, but disabling xinerama
mode may get you closer to what you want).

It might be easier to buy an NVidia or ATI graphics card (after
checking for support)... which is even possible on some laptops.

Liam

--
Liam R. E. Quin <***@holoweb.net>
Words and Pictures from Old Books - http://www.fromoldbooks.org/

Ken Taylor

2016-01-18 00:17:41 UTC