|
From: <gm...@in...> - 2001-12-31 15:34:55
|
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:19:15 -0800 (PST) > From: Linus Torvalds <tor...@tr...> > To: Timothy Covell <tim...@as...> > Cc: Andrew Morton <ak...@zi...>, lin...@vg..., > Linux Frame Buffer Device Development > <lin...@li...>, > Marcelo Tosatti <ma...@co...> > Subject: Re: [patch] Re: Framebuffer...Why oh Why??? > > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Timothy Covell wrote: > > > > When X11 locks up, I can still kill it and my box lives. When > > framebuffers crash, their is no recovery save rebooting. Back in 1995 > > I thought that linux VTs and X11 implemenation blew Solaris out of the > > water, and now we want throw away our progress? I'm still astounded > > by the whole "oooh I can see a penquin while I boot-up" thing? > > Granted, frame buffers have usage in embedded systems, but do they > > really have to be so deeply integrated?? > > They aren't. > > No sane person should use frame buffers if they have the choice. > > Like your mama told you: "Just say no". Use text-mode and X11, and be > happy. > > Some people don't have the choice, of course. > > Linus Like the no choice if having one's 11 year old syster try to use the thing? Text-mode and X11 seem to work fine if you walk on egg shells but just try switching from console to text mode and back again several times. Eventually it _will_ crash. Or worse yet mix svgalib and X11. My brother and sister both used to crash my system at least 3 times a week before framebuffer + fbdev came into play. Gerhard -- Gerhard Mack gm...@in... <>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing. |