On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 04 July 2011 11:20:43 Mark Knecht did opine thusly: >> > The way I've been doing this only required `vesa' or `uvesa' and >> > some special kernel line stuff. None of the X related stuff is >> > necessary. >> > >> > From covici's post... I think I may need to say uvesa where I've >> > been saying vesa. >> > >> > I'm going to try that some time today. Its already enabled in >> > my kernel >> >> I'm a little confused by his post also, but I've never run a machine >> without Xorg so maybe it's a technical point. With a framebuffer I >> believe you can get a boot screen like the Install CD - a bunch of >> little Tux's across the top - so you're doing graphics at that >> point but you're not running X? >> >> I was curious about this topic awhile back wondering if you could >> run a Gentoo VM with only a framebuffer and get any graphics at >> all, or is it just that the framebuffer is used to give you more >> control over the console font/height/width selection. >> >> (I've never run a framebuffer, if that's not obvious!) > > bootsplash does not run under X (well, on redhat it used to, but you > really don't want to go there) - this should be obvious as you don't > see the X start-up sequence happening at early boot time. > > There are many things boot splash could use for displaying images > (fbcon etc etc) or even something of it's own invention. I'm not > familiar enough with it to say how it really does it. > > > -- > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com > so does bootsplash run using framebuffer or is it completely different?
- Mark
