Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:18:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:18:14 -0500 Received: from svr3.applink.net ([206.50.88.3]:65037 "EHLO svr3.applink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:18:10 -0500 Message-Id: <200112302117.fBULHISr011887@svr3.applink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Timothy Covell Reply-To: timothy.covell@ashavan.org To: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Frame Buffer Device Development , Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [patch] Re: Framebuffer...Why oh Why??? Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:13:29 -0600 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] In-Reply-To: <20011227195037.GA229@znex> <3C2D0D13.CB1C5683@zip.com.au> <3C2ED18D.FA550F1A@zip.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3C2ED18D.FA550F1A@zip.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 30 December 2001 02:34, Andrew Morton wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > However I don't see why _any_ architecture wants framebuffer contents > > to be included in core files. It sounds risky. > > [snip] 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?? -- timothy.covell@ashavan.org. - 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/