Re: [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 <[e-mail]>
> To: Timothy Covell <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
>      Linux Frame Buffer Device Development
>     <[e-mail]>,
>      Marcelo Tosatti <[e-mail]>
> 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

[e-mail]

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