From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jan 22 13: 9:31 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C265C37B401 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:09:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from postfix3-2.free.fr (postfix3-2.free.fr [213.228.0.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089FE43ED8 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:09:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nsouch@free.fr) Received: from armor.fastether (nas-cbv-8-62-147-157-185.dial.proxad.net [62.147.157.185]) by postfix3-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 086FDC12D for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:09:27 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 8475 invoked by uid 1001); 22 Jan 2003 21:23:35 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:23:35 +0100 From: Nicolas Souchu To: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Newbusifying kbd? Message-ID: <20030122222335.A8449@armor.fastether> References: <20030119225129.A6948@armor.fastether> <20030119233031.GA24377@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030120074638.A11055@armor.fastether> <20030120222027.GA597@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <3E2D173C.3040507@graphics.cs.uni-sb.de> <20030122091519.B6700@armor.fastether> <20030122081923.GA10985@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20030122081923.GA10985@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>; from marcel@xcllnt.net on Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:19:23AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:19:23AM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 09:15:19AM +0100, Nicolas Souchu wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 10:47:40AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > > Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > > > [KGI] > > > > > > > I took a quick look at it. I'm not opposed to having graphics support > > > > in the kernel. The problem I think I see is that we probably have > > > > enough interest to make standard VGA work, but never really have the > > > > people or interest to keep up with the latest and greatest graphics > > > > engine. So, I think this would be useful only in a model where the > > > > graphics drivers are contributed and the X server makes use of it. > > > > So, if XFree86 changes to this model, then I see potential... > > > > > > Chicken and egg problem... as far as I remember (I looked at it looong > > > ago) they have a X server too... or at least they want to provide one. > > > > KGI provides a X server accelerated (PhoneiX) implementation not based on X. On > > the other hand GGI (http://www.ggi-project.org), the user library going > > with KGI does provide XFree86 (called XGGI) running) on top of the KGI > > driver framework without its own drivers. > > Do I understand correctly that "without its own drivers" means that > XFree86 doesn't have its own drivers and thus that the kernel driver > is the hardware driver that's being used (though KGI)? You do. -- Nicholas Souchu - nsouch@free.fr - nsouch@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message