Re: [buildd] Machines upgraded
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Larry Moore wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 02:50:18PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 02:19:42PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 05:41:05AM -0500, Larry Moore wrote:
> > > > > > I've upgraded the following machines lately to kernel 2.6.23-m68k and
> > > > > > etch-m68k:
> > > > > I tried 2.6.21 and .22, but reverted to 2.2.25 because I couldn't get X
> > > > > running.
> > > >
> > > > Well, I'm not running X on those machines as those are autobuilders... ;)
> > >
> > > Thats correct, and crest and kullervo use the same kernels. But it would
> > > still be interesting to know what is needed to get X running with current
> > > kernels. Maybe somebody could start a wiki page with successful combinations
> > > of hard- and software? I wouldn't mind to have a working X on my Amiga
> > > again, even though I will probably not use it. The same is true for mac and
> > > atari I guess, any volunteers?
> > >
> > > And if something is missing in the kernel, please let me know or send a
> > > patch.
> >
> > Kernel should be OK, unless you're using one of those frame buffer
> > device drivers we `lost' in the conversion from 2.4 to 2.6.
> >
> > E.g. for Amiga native graphics, the main issue is that current xorg
> > doesn't support bitplanes (AFAIK). The same is true for Atari.
>
> what's the alternative if there's no kernel framebuffer?
If there's no kernel frame buffer, you won't have a console on
Linux/m68k. So you first want to write a frame buffer device.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Reply to: