Gustavo Carvalho Homem wrote:
One thing I can't find in the documentation. Are there advantages (or
disadvantages) of using XF86_FBDev over XFree86 4.1 with fbdev driver ? Any
other relevant comments ?
The big disadvantage is that XF86_FBDev is ooold and lacks a lot of features
like shadow
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 11:16:29PM +0100, Gustavo Carvalho Homem wrote:
Hello all:
hi.
One thing I can't find in the documentation. Are there advantages (or
disadvantages) of using XF86_FBDev over XFree86 4.1 with fbdev driver ?
I only see an advantage for situations where Xserver is missing
Peter Surda wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 11:16:29PM +0100, Gustavo Carvalho Homem wrote:
One thing I can't find in the documentation. Are there advantages (or
disadvantages) of using XF86_FBDev over XFree86 4.1 with fbdev driver ?
I only see an advantage for situations where Xserver
Hi dude.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:07:11PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
When did you last try the fbdev driver? It supports DGA as of 4.1.0 and I
wonder why it should be slower than the vesa driver as both use the same
shadow framebuffer.
I stopped using fbdev in January so may be I missed
Peter Surda wrote:
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:07:11PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
When did you last try the fbdev driver? It supports DGA as of 4.1.0 and I
wonder why it should be slower than the vesa driver as both use the same
shadow framebuffer.
I stopped using fbdev in January so may
Hello Michel:
Thank you very much for your answeer. So from what I read from you I
would say that for an installer it would be better to use the old
XF86_FBDev since one does not need in this case to use the new fancy
features and from your words we get the impressions that the old one could
Hello all:
One thing I can't find in the documentation. Are there advantages (or
disadvantages) of using XF86_FBDev over XFree86 4.1 with fbdev driver ? Any
other relevant comments ?
Thank you very much
Gustavo Homem
---
