Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts

[David Lang]

On Sun, 28 May 2006, Jon Smirl wrote:

> > b) loading fbdev drivers breaks X in a lot of cases, we need to be a
> > bit more careful.
>
> It is perfectly legal to load an fbdev driver with X today. If it
> doesn't work it is a bug in X and should be fixed.
>
> > c) Lots of distros don't use fbdev drivers, forcing this on them to
> > use drm isn't an option.
>
> Why isn't this an option? Will the distros that insist on continuing
> to ship three conflicting video drivers fighting over a single piece
> of hardware please stand up and be counted? Distros get new drivers
> all the time, why will this be any different?

as a long time linux user I tend to not to use the framebuffer, but 
instead use the standard vga text drivers (with X and sometimes dri/drm).

in part this dates back to my early experiances with the framebuffer code 
when it was first introduced, but I still find that the framebuffer is not 
as nice to use as the simpler direct access for text modes. and when I 
start X up it doesn't need a framebuffer, so why suffer with the 
performance hit of the framebuffer?

yes, some hardware requires a framebuffer to display anything, but for 
most video cards, the hardware scrolling of a pure text mode is better 
(faster, smoother, less cpu required, etc) then the framebuffer 
equivalent.

David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/