On Saturday 26 May 2007 12:32, James Richard Tyrer wrote: > Loris Cuoghi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to point out this proposal for a reworked kernel graphics > > subsystem. > > > > http://kerneltrap.org/node/8242 > > > > One of the many interesting posts in the thread: > > > > http://lists.duskglow.com/open-graphics/2006-August/007196.html > > While some work is needed to rationalize the current mess, I don't > think that too much of the graphics system should be in the Kernel. > Currently, X11 can crash and not affect the Kernel at all. This > shouldn't change -- a new graphics system shouldn't pull the Kernel > down with it if (make that when since graphics is much less stable > than the Kernel) it crashes, the Kernel must survive the crash.
Does it really matter all that much? If (when) my X hangs, I have to reboot the system to get the system back to a usable (i.e. with a GUI, this is a desktop workstation) state, even if the kernel is still running and I can still access the system over the network. Unless the kernel can clean up after X and put the hardware back into a workable state. Lourens
pgppjF8kUmUXt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
