Don’t know if this is applicable to all systems, or, it’s “just me”…
Following the 20190209 snapshot (which had an update for grub2), the resolution for the graphical splash/boot menu is no longer correctly set when using the “Autodetect by grub2” option, I’ve had to explicitly set the correct screen resolution.
Any one else ???
I have not noticed a problem. However, I have only upgraded to 20190209 on a VM. I have not yet done that update on real hardware.
OK… Thanks.
I’m guessing as there’s no other takers on this one “it’s me”. I’ll wait until there’s been one or two more grub updates then switch back to autodetect to see if it’s magically fixed itself.
I’m now beyond 20190209 (actually at 20190214) on two bare metal systems. I’m still not seeing a problem. These are all using Intel graphics.
A recent grub2 update was supposed to solve the problem, that you cannot read the grub menu lines because they are wider than the screen. And the fix is to allow using CTRL-L and CTRL-R to move left or right. I have not tested this, but perhaps this is the change that is affecting you.
I’ve seen this also, but today’s update fixed it.
I’ve updated to 20190217 and switched back to “Autodetect by grub2” … still seeing the problem of wrong (low) resolution.
@nrickert this machine has nvidia/nouveau, so perhaps why I’m seeing the problem and you’re not.
Not going to worry about it, I’ll just leave the resolution as explicitly set rather than autodetect.
Yes, that’s quite likely.
It could be this patch:
Thu Jan 24 09:26:09 UTC 2019 - mchang@suse.com
- Improved hiDPI device support (FATE#326680)
* grub2-video-limit-the-resolution-for-fixed-bimap-font.patch
which restricts default resolution to 1920x1080:
+ else
+ {
+ /* Limit the range of preferred resolution not exceeding FHD
+ to keep the fixed bitmap font readable */
+ preferred_width = (preferred_width < 1920) ? preferred_width : 1920;
+ preferred_height = (preferred_height < 1080) ? preferred_height : 1080;
+ }
although I would not call it “low resolution”.
Unfortunately neither you nor another recent poster ever explained what resolution you expect and what resolution you get so anything is just a guesswork.
Thanks for that, looks like the “culprit”…
I didn’t actually say it was low resolution, just that the resolution wasn’t being detected correctly. 
The monitor I have attached has a native resolution of 1920 x 1200, so yes it could well be that patch, 1920 x 1080 would be scaled to fit by the monitor and certainly wouldn’t “look right”, slightly distorted with a trace of fuzziness on the text.
Not bothered since explicitly setting the screen resolution rather than using auto-detect.
Sorry, but you did:
still seeing the problem of wrong (low) resolution
The monitor I have attached has a native resolution of 1920 x 1200, so yes it could well be that patch, 1920 x 1080 would be scaled to fit by the monitor and certainly wouldn’t “look right”, slightly distorted with a trace of fuzziness on the text.
Well, that’s certainly topic for bug report. May be patch could use some fuzz around 1920x1080 to include common resolutions.
So I did… My sincere apologies. I should have re-read all my posts in the thread, not just the first one.
I wonder what the rationale was in limiting the resolution anyway as opposed to using the detected resolution. I’d have thought that the vast majority of users now have LCD/LED monitors, and unlike their CRT predecessors, don’t look too good at anything other than their native resolution.
Edit: Obviously not awake this morning… bring on more coffee.
The reason was stated in the patch…