On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 01:03:33PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> Care to create a patch for the silent mode now? That should be simple
> enough to get into the kernel, and will be a good place to build off of
> for the rest of the things people want (verbose mode, etc.)
I've just sent the whole thing
Hi!
> Hmm, maybe I should change the vesafb test in the bootsplash code
> to test if fb_imageblit == cfb_imageblit. This would make Pavel
> very happy, I guess ;-)
Yes, I like that one. Also it is likely going to be cleaner than
vesafb_ops hack.
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:03:25PM +0100, Michal Januszewski wrote:
> Possibly, but I can't recall what exactly was it about. All bugs in
> fbsplash, that I have known of, have been fixed. If there are still some
> problems with any fb drivers, please let me know.
Well, you'll run into trouble wit
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 08:41:23PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi,
> [aj added to the list].
>
> Andreas, who is the person to talk about this? I like redhat's
> solution the best. Pass "quiet", perhaps replace penguin with some big
> picture including penguin and chameleon or something, and do t
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 06:40:15PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi,
> > It doesn't really need vesafb for anything. Back in the days of 2.6.7
> > I used to release a version of bootsplash that had the dep. on vesafb
> > removed. It worked fine with at least some other fb drivers.
> >
> > You mi
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 01:03:33PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> Care to create a patch for the silent mode now? That should be simple
> enough to get into the kernel, and will be a good place to build off of
> for the rest of the things people want (verbose mode, etc.)
Sure, I'll post a patch as soon
Hi!
> > Just in case someone is interested, this is bootsplash for 2.6.11-rc4,
> > taken from suse kernel. I'll probably try to modify it to work with
> > radeonfb.
> >
> > Any ideas why bootsplash needs to hack into vesafb? It only uses
> > vesafb_ops
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 08:52:06PM +0100, Michal Januszewski wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 08:31:39PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > well.. how much does it really need in kernel space? I mean, with all
> > drivers as modules, and the "quiet" option, initramfs runs *really*
> > fast. And
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 08:31:39PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> well.. how much does it really need in kernel space? I mean, with all
> drivers as modules, and the "quiet" option, initramfs runs *really*
> fast. And that can just bang a bitmap to the framebuffer as first
> thing... (rhgb does
Hi!
> > Well, I like rhgb the best (because it is 100% userspace and I do not
> > have to deal with it :-), but it seems like bootsplash should be
> > deprecated in favor of fbsplash.
>
> well.. how much does it really need in kernel space? I mean, with all
> drivers as modules, and the "quiet" o
> Well, I like rhgb the best (because it is 100% userspace and I do not
> have to deal with it :-), but it seems like bootsplash should be
> deprecated in favor of fbsplash.
well.. how much does it really need in kernel space? I mean, with all
drivers as modules, and the "quiet" option, initramfs
Hi!
> > Yes, I agree, almost anything is more sane than code I posted :-(. My
> > only requirement is that it works with radeonfb and similar low-level
> > drivers (so that I can get suspend-to-ram to work) and that it gets
> > past our branding people...
>
> I don't know about the branding pe
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 02:15:05PM +0100, Michal Januszewski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 03:03:26PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > Pavel, I agree with Michal, take a look at this version of the code
> > instead of the version that you posted. It's a _whole_ lot more sane,
> > and possibly even
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Michal Januszewski wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 12:25:19AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
How many distros do use some variant of bootsplash? SuSE does, from
above url I guess gentoo does, too... Does RedHat do something
similar? [Or
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 12:25:19AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi,
> Yes, I agree, almost anything is more sane than code I posted :-(. My
> only requirement is that it works with radeonfb and similar low-level
> drivers (so that I can get suspend-to-ram to work) and that it gets
> past our brand
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 03:03:26PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> Pavel, I agree with Michal, take a look at this version of the code
> instead of the version that you posted. It's a _whole_ lot more sane,
> and possibly even mergable.
>
> Michal, any thoughts on submitting it for inclusion? It seems
> How many distros do use some variant of bootsplash? SuSE does, from
> above url I guess gentoo does, too... Does Red Hat do something
> similar? [Or do they just set log-level to very high giving them clean
> look?] What about Debian?
Red Hat/Fedora uses "quiet" boot option, plus a userspace ea
Hi!
> > > Just in case someone is interested, this is bootsplash for 2.6.11-rc4,
> > > taken from suse kernel. I'll probably try to modify it to work with
> > > radeonfb.
> > >
> > > Any ideas why bootsplash needs to hack into vesafb? It only
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 02:14:34AM +0100, Michal Januszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 05:52:54PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Just in case someone is interested, this is bootsplash for 2.6.11-rc4,
> > taken from suse kernel. I'll probably
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 05:52:54PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi,
> Just in case someone is interested, this is bootsplash for 2.6.11-rc4,
> taken from suse kernel. I'll probably try to modify it to work with
> radeonfb.
>
> Any ideas why bootsplash needs to hack into
Hi!
Just in case someone is interested, this is bootsplash for 2.6.11-rc4,
taken from suse kernel. I'll probably try to modify it to work with
radeonfb.
Any ideas why bootsplash needs to hack into vesafb? It only uses
vesafb_ops to test against them before some kind of
21 matches
Mail list logo
