[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: what happened to vesafb support in 2.6.13-1?

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 02:35:39PM +0200, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:31:18PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 06:00:55PM +0200, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> > > the old legacy modular vesafb patch got dropped.
> > > and it seems it was overlooked to set them to yes.
> > 
> > I think I might have made that change, and at the very least
> > I remember discussing it. I think that the idea was that
> > it has actually been superceeded by another module. However
> > if this isn't the case, I guess setting it to yes is a good idea.
> > Does anyone know what this might break?
> well the d-i guys should get a notice:
> currently vesa failed by default so they dropped into vga16,
> which is known not to work on a range of laptops.

On some laptops, only vga16fb works. On others, only vesafb works. The
reason we try both is so that you can have vga16fb by default (which has
fairly good coverage, albeit not perfect) and try vesafb if you know the
right vga=MODE argument to give the kernel.

Matthew Garrett tells me that only vga16fb supports suspend/resume.

> as background info the old half-baken vesa modular patch conflicts
> with upstream fixes. hch, waldi and i decided that to be a good
> time to drop it.

Unless the hardware support of one or other framebuffer driver has been
radically improved, or unless there's something else I'm
misunderstanding, I think we still need modular vesafb?


Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson@debian.org]

Reply to: