[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GGI and Things
> Anyway, it seems absurd to me that there is no real display
> drivers in the kernel. I don't know about what those kernel
> folks think, but the whole point of a "kernel" or OS is to
> provide a hardware abstraction to the user-level programs.
I fired some mail off to Alan Cox hopefully getting a more informed
answer. I'm guessing at the reason being that the GGI project may not be
written to the specs that the kernel developers want. Again.. I'm just
speculating at the reason here.
> The kernel supports everything under the sun, except display
> cards. Those guys are going to realize eventually that they
> need some sort of unified display interface. If it isn't KGI,
> it'll be something else (Which GGI could then be implemented
> on top of, hey!).
> Also, note that small portions of GGI have been integrated
> with the kernel already. I don't know what fbcons does
> specifically, the GGI web page kinda bites.
I'll second that one.
when I get some more info I'll post.