Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:54:56 -0700 | From | "Robert Moss" <> | Subject | Framebuffer issues in 2.6.26 with uvesafb and vesafb. Linux is about choice! |
| |
Hello Linux maintainers,
Firstly, I would like to extend my deepest appreciation for your dedication the linux project. I use nothing but linux, and am happy to say, I love it to death.
However, since I've installed 2.6.26, I've noticed what I believe to be a serious detriment to the community. While in itself, its not major, if trends like it continue...
Anyhow, I noticed that vesafb is no longer a part of the kernel. I have debian sid, and its 2.6.26-1 kernel seemed to have CONFIG_FB_VESA=Y in its config, but it didn't work. So I naturally compiled my own kernel, making sure to explicitly mark Y for the option. However, vga=791 still gave a mode not found. After much trial and error, and googling, I was able to get uvesafb working, however, it doesn't start until later in the boot sequence (unfavorable), and also, with splashy, the background image is stretched vertically over 500% showing only an ugly top portion of the image.
Now I could care less about the splash screen, its the principle. I spent days working on trying different things, researching, and compiling, all to no avail. I don't understand why you couldn't leave vesafb in there (and if it is in there, its terribly broken) And uvesafb is a serious pain to get set up for someone with an advanced level of experience, and out of reach for newcomers and even those who've mastered Windoze machines and are fresh converts.
For the time being, I am using 2.6.24, because linux works like its supposed to here. Right after grub, the framebuffer kicks in (and while uvesafb might be nice, with extra features, having to wait for it is not) and next thing I know, splashy works fine, more importantly, pidgin (finch) and links work in the framebuffer console (which also work once I finally got uvesafb working, but it was hardly worth it).
Until uvesafb matures to the point that it can be a valid replacement for vesafb, don't do it, and when that day comes, let users have a choice.
Thank you for hearing my concerns, and keep up the good work.
p.s., I'm currently starting work on a patch to get vesafb back up and working on 2.6.26, but thats neither here nor there, give those that cannot help themselves with code the choice they come to linux for!
| |