Comment # 32 on bug 835975 from Gary Greene

(In reply to Gary Greene from comment #31)
> @@ -125,3 +125,3 @@
>      for (i = 0; i < xf86NumDrivers; i++) {
> -         xf86CallDriverProbe(xf86DriverList[i], FALSE);
> +         xf86NumScreens = xf86CallDriverProbe(xf86DriverList[i], FALSE);
>      }

Hmmm, after thinking about it, the code needs to do something like this
instead:

@@ -125,3 +125,4 @@
     for (i = 0; i < xf86NumDrivers; i++) {
-         xf86CallDriverProbe(xf86DriverList[i], FALSE);
+         xf8NumScreens = 0;
+         xf86NumScreens += xf86CallDriverProbe(xf86DriverList[i], FALSE);
     }

This way, if there are multiple screens, it accurately reflects the count.
Additionally, this ensures that we're always working with sane numbers in the
comparison just below it.