看板 FB_hackers 關於我們 聯絡資訊
--8S1fMsFYqgBC+BN/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 01:44:42PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >control over everything. On top of that, we can't use any >code in the loader from the kernel, so whatever support we >add, we need to add to the kernel too. We can't re-use the same executable bytes but, with care, we should be able to reuse some of the source code. > At least, I think >it's lame to support fancy graphics in the loader and then >not support at least the same in the kernel. If you raise >the bar for the loader, you also have to raise it for the >kernel. How else would the kernel be able to use the console? We already have splash(4) and can support a character-mode interface to a graphics-mode adapter. IMHO, the major reason for having graphics support in the kernel is KGI/GGI - which offers the possibility of being able to use DDB from X. >So, the question is: how important is it for the user to >be able to tweak it all. For GGI, quite important because the kernel is defining the X resolution. Whether that needs to be the same as the resolution used by the boot loader is a different question. --=20 Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour. --8S1fMsFYqgBC+BN/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHvT1x/opHv/APuIcRAhnrAKDED6Q1woXR1W1lV9cy2b7ivutEZgCeI3pm b7eQ5Z0ZYrzCZ/gt1J8hCpM= =zjEN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8S1fMsFYqgBC+BN/--