Hi folks,
I haven't played with 2.5.x kernels for quite some time, so
maybe I missed something, but shouldn't there be a penguin
logo at boot time? AFAICT I have enabled vesa framebuffer,
fbconsole, and a 224 colors boot logo. The first few lines
are not scrolled at boot time, but Tux is gone.
On kernel 2.4.21 Tux is back.
Regards
Harri
Hi,
> I haven't played with 2.5.x kernels for quite some time, so
> maybe I missed something, but shouldn't there be a penguin
> logo at boot time? AFAICT I have enabled vesa framebuffer,
> fbconsole, and a 224 colors boot logo. The first few lines
> are not scrolled at boot time, but Tux is gone.
>
Try Graphics support --->Logo configuration --->[*] Bootup logo
Regards,
/ismail
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 20:39, ismail (cartman) donmez wrote:
> Try Graphics support --->Logo configuration --->[*] Bootup logo
You can't activate the 224 colors logo without Bootup Logo active.
I have the same problem with these lines in .config
CONFIG_LOGO=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_MONO=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_VGA16=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_CLUT224=y
--
Flameeyes
On 16 Jun 03 at 20:53, Flameeyes wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 20:39, ismail (cartman) donmez wrote:
> > Try Graphics support --->Logo configuration --->[*] Bootup logo
> You can't activate the 224 colors logo without Bootup Logo active.
> I have the same problem with these lines in .config
>
> CONFIG_LOGO=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_MONO=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_VGA16=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_CLUT224=y
It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.
At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should
not matter, yes?
Petr Vandrovec
> It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.
>
> At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
> yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
> is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should
> not matter, yes?
Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test
} else if (image->depth == bpp)
Its should be
} else if (image->depth <= bpp)
instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth
matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of
equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.
James Simmons wrote:
>
> Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test
>
> } else if (image->depth == bpp)
>
> Its should be
>
> } else if (image->depth <= bpp)
>
> instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth
> matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of
> equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.
>
Tux is back.
Many thanx
Harri
Hi folks,
James Simmons wrote:
>>It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.
>>
>>At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
>>yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
>>is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should
>>not matter, yes?
>
>
> Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test
>
> } else if (image->depth == bpp)
>
> Its should be
>
> } else if (image->depth <= bpp)
>
> instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth
> matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of
> equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.
>
Would it be possible to include this change in the official
source tree?
Regards
Harri
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Harald Dunkel wrote:
[Boot Logo Stuff]
> Would it be possible to include this change in the official
> source tree?
This paticular change (and several) others are in a set of fb updates that
James posted a day or three ago. It's kind of out of his hands now. I'm
sure they'll get in eventually.
You can search your friendly, neighborhood lkml archive for the post with
the newest fb patch's URL.
--
Alex Goddard
[email protected]