Re: Debian on ARM platforms...
Jim Studt wrote:
> Scott Bambrough wrote...
> > 1. Will it ship with 2.2? My general sense of the state of things is no, but
> > correct me if I am wrong.
>
> We are not scheduled for potato, but if we get our boot disks together
> we should be released. We have something like 3500 packages built. A
> bunch of them accidentally ended up in woody, I'm working to move them
> back into potato.
Cool, so the potato release is possible? If so, this is great news!
> Debian does not have an accelerated X server for the netwinder. I've
> been using the FBDev X server to test on the box, mostly I use a remote
> X server. It would be good to kit an accelerated X server, I haven't
> look at the issue at all.
Hmm, shouldn't the fbdev X server be able to use the accels in cyber2000fb? I have
heard that the atyfb and clgenfb accels were relatively simple additions to Xfb.
Or is the problem that cyber2000fb is not stable enough to handle a plain Xfb (it
hangs the machine on anything bigger than 640x480x8), let alone an accelerated
one? When I have some free time in a month or so, I'd like to look into the
framebuffer to see why Xfb is not working with cyber2000fb, and might investigate
acceleration.
But the question is one of strategy: should we focus on an SVGA X server, or an
FBDev one? I'd be inclined toward the latter, I think a lot of the justifications
behind fb/Xfb are valid (security, should be easier to adapt Xfb than SVGA). What
are some of the reasons to favor SVGA?
Not that any of this will get into potato... :-)
-Adam P.
Reply to: