Why is that better? What transition between two resolutions are causing problems?

I'm just talking about order in the dropdown in the Display settings. Not about any transition.

The current order looks semi-random to me. The horizontal res is the first value, so ordering by it would look far more natural.

(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm just talking about order in the dropdown in the Display settings. Not about
> any transition.

I understood that. I was asking if "1024x768" -> "1280x768" was in the wrong direction for example.

> The current order looks semi-random to me. The horizontal res is the first
> value, so ordering by it would look far more natural.

Right, got it.

Ah, no, descending is fine.

Before (now):
1920 x 1200
1920 x 1080
1600 x 1200
1680 x 1050
1400 x 1050
1280 x 1024
1440 x 900
1280 x 960
1366 x 768
1360 x 768

After (requested):

1920 x 1200
1920 x 1080
1680 x 1050
1600 x 1200
1440 x 900
1400 x 1050
1366 x 768
1360 x 768
1280 x 1024
1280 x 960

Created attachment 209182 [details] [review]
display: Sort resolutions by width first

Review of attachment 209182 [details] [review]:

> SORT_COL, width * 10000 + height

10000 might not be large enough to separate width and height if for example Eyefinity is used

(In reply to comment #6)
> Review of attachment 209182 [details] [review]:
> 
> > SORT_COL, width * 10000 + height
> 
> 10000 might not be large enough to separate width and height if for example
> Eyefinity is used

The day somebody sends me 2 6-display rigs, I'll change the code. I also doubt that the machines that support this width have support for XRandR. In the worst case, I'll fix it in GNOME 10 :)

With the patch, I get 

1366 x 768
1024 x 768
 800 x 600

So it seems to work fine.

Thanks for testing!

Attachment 209182 [details] pushed as 048a9bc - display: Sort resolutions by width first