[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] Re: Framebuffer...Why oh Why???
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:19:15 -0800 (PST)
> From: Linus Torvalds <>
> To: Timothy Covell <>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <>,,
> Linux Frame Buffer Device Development
> <>,
> Marcelo Tosatti <>
> 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

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 Mack

<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean