Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 23:17:40 +0100 From: Nicolas Souchu <nsouch@free.fr> To: Martin <nakal@web.de> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Yet another sysinstall thread Message-ID: <20050209221740.GA10794@breizh> In-Reply-To: <1107848499.815.30.camel@klotz.local> References: <20050208034855.D211E43D45@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20050208040642.GA37528@xor.obsecurity.org> <1107848499.815.30.camel@klotz.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 08:41:39AM +0100, Martin wrote: > Am Montag, den 07.02.2005, 20:06 -0800 schrieb Kris Kennaway: > > > Fine, yeah, sysinstall sucks, but writing emails proposing > > specifications for how someone else should implement a replacement > > isn't going to get that job done. Thousands of words have been > > written on that topic over the years, but precious little code. > > I've been trying to port one of my framebuffer-based linux applications, > but I ran into problem with VESA-support on the terminal (inconsistent? > incomplete?) and after even the simpliest VGA-based (320x200) apps > failed to execute leaving me hanging in graphics mode and panic()ing, > I gave up. This was my experience with libvgl last year. > > When I wrote to this list last year, someone suggested to take a look > at KGI4BSD. That's of course nice, but to start programming something, > it would be nice to have the feeling that you have everything you need You should rather rely on GGI (http://www.ggi-project.org) It is very versatile and will allow you to output on vgl(4) or KGI4BSD as you wish. It gives graphic routines and generic framebuffer access. > in the base distribution. And btw, I don't see KGI4BSD supporting VESA > which I would prefer in the first step, because every VGA-card has got VESA is fully supported. It is the most I use here. > this interface and you don't need acceleration when developing simple > applications. KGI4BSD seems to support Matrox- and ATI-only cards > which I don't have here. I'm waiting for KGI4BSD to extend the driver > support and to merge the code into -CURRENT. The people have a good > idea there, but the project is moving slowly. Unfortunatelly, I Indeed the project is slow :( > cannot help with kernel development, because of lack of experience. > It would be nice to see more effort and more developers working at > this project. > > It is a piece of work to write a small widget toolkit and when you > you run into trouble with basic things, it is no fun anymore. GGI is your friend ;) Nicholas
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050209221740.GA10794>