Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:07:35 +0100 | From | Stefan Reinauer <> | Subject | Re: Bootscreen |
| |
* Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> [030128 15:50]: > On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 12:10, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > > It's not too much to even state that almost any computer working with > > Linux 2.4+ can do 800x600 or 1024x768. Anything below that can be > > considered a special case, regarding the numbers out there. But that > > does not influence the possibility of using a bootsplash graphics. > > On a system you can't use it properly, you probably also would not > > want it (i.e. use normal text mode boot instead of a framebuffer > > driver) > > Lots of systems cannot do 800x600 or 1024x768. Some of them cannot > do 640x480 very well but 640x480 is safe except for weird kit because > of the VGA mode support.
Safe or not safe depends highly on the kind of hardware we are talking about. To clarify: 1024x768 is not a problem on most new PCs bought today. For a PDA or embedded system you maybe only have 320x244. My point was rather, if the graphics hardware cannot display a graphical bootup without drawbacks, it does not hurt to disable it and go back to text.
Stefan
-- The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offense. -- E. W. Dijkstra - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |