On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Firstname Lastname wrote:
> ok, I'm fuzzy here. if libggi can use KGI or fbcon, then why make a KGIcon
> driver (differnt fron the KGI driver) which redirects KGI calls to fbcon
> calls?
kgicon is a way to use KGI drivers without patching the kernel, by
having them emulate and extend the kernel's built-in fbcon interface.
> what is KGI supposed to do that fbcon does not?
> (and KGIcon is not just a differnt name for KGI, right?)
Nope. KGIcon is a limited form of KGI.
KGI isn't limited by the design of the Linux kernel because it patches
the kernel, so it can do a lot more things e.g. using the page fault
handler and keeping the hardware completely secure from even malicious
applications. KGIcon supports the interfaces of KGI that don't need to
patch the kernel, like the KGI mode setting API -- things that we feel
are better implemented in KGI than in the fbdev design, or it can
also be used where there's a KGI driver but not an fbdev driver for a
certain chipset in order to get the fbcon API working on that chipset.
A whole discussion of the differences in design between fbdev and
KGI would make this a long and redundant post -- there's stuff on the
WWW site about KGI's design and the reasons behind it.
--
Brian
