Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > > On 15-Sep-99 Werner Heuser wrote: > > Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > >> > >> Why framebuffer? > > - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux > > X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card > > support, at least if the card manufacturers follow > > the VESA VBE standard. > > - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the > > current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, > > please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > > > > At the same time, I would like to keep the laptop kernel the same as Debian's. > Just with the needed pieces. This would be great. My opinions in the proposal are not meant as a must, or something what have to be done from the very beginning. And of coarse it has to be discussed like now. I will try to make this more clear in the next issue. Also I try to include the discussion in this list. Cheers -werner- -- Werner Heuser | There is no time, /~~ LiLAC - Linux with Laptop Computers | ... to make war ... /~~~ Berlin, Germany | -Lou Reed-/ T. +49 30 349 53 86 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.snafu.de/~wehe/index_li.html
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > > On 15-Sep-99 Werner Heuser wrote: > > Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > >> > >> Why framebuffer? > > - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux > > X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card > > support, at least if the card manufacturers follow > > the VESA VBE standard. > > - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the > > current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, > > please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > > > > At the same time, I would like to keep the laptop kernel the same as Debian's. > Just with the needed pieces. This would be great. My opinions in the proposal are not meant as a must, or something what have to be done from the very beginning. And of coarse it has to be discussed like now. I will try to make this more clear in the next issue. Also I try to include the discussion in this list. Cheers -werner- -- Werner Heuser | There is no time, /~~ LiLAC - Linux with Laptop Computers | ... to make war ... /~~~ Berlin, Germany | -Lou Reed-/ T. +49 30 349 53 86 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.snafu.de/~wehe/index_li.html
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On 15-Sep-99 Werner Heuser wrote: > Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: >> >> Why framebuffer? > - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux > X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card > support, at least if the card manufacturers follow > the VESA VBE standard. > - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the > current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, > please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > At the same time, I would like to keep the laptop kernel the same as Debian's. Just with the needed pieces. >> pentium ops are actually minimal compared to the -O2 output from egcc, plus >> the >> code is larger > Do we have kind of a benchmark, let's say for X build with options. X is not very cpu bound. There have been tests done, do not know where. The gain is a few percent (I think it is less than or near 5). > ... >> the xserver in potato works with all supported Neomagic chips, a separate >> neomagic server is no longer needed > I checked http://www.debian.org/Packages/unstable/x11/ today. > 'neomagic' isn't in the headlines. Where shall I look? > It is part of the xserver-svga -- no need for a separate server. > ... >> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into >> slowly > You wrote in another mail: " Several groups are working on a generic > hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use > these to detect hardware." > > I agree. We shouldn't make our own laptop hardware detection program. > But the projects I checked, didn't support certain laptop hardware > detection yet. For instance, I would like to have IrDA controller, > ACPI and VESA/VBE correctly detected. Of coarse the actual list > is longer. - Therefore my intension is, to have some laptop people > working together with a good hardware detection program. > Personally I prefer the Mandrake - Lothar - Project (but > this has to be researched). And an according Debian package. > Agreed.
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On 15-Sep-99 Werner Heuser wrote: > Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: >> >> Why framebuffer? > - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux > X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card > support, at least if the card manufacturers follow > the VESA VBE standard. > - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the > current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, > please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > At the same time, I would like to keep the laptop kernel the same as Debian's. Just with the needed pieces. >> pentium ops are actually minimal compared to the -O2 output from egcc, plus >> the >> code is larger > Do we have kind of a benchmark, let's say for X build with options. X is not very cpu bound. There have been tests done, do not know where. The gain is a few percent (I think it is less than or near 5). > ... >> the xserver in potato works with all supported Neomagic chips, a separate >> neomagic server is no longer needed > I checked http://www.debian.org/Packages/unstable/x11/ today. > 'neomagic' isn't in the headlines. Where shall I look? > It is part of the xserver-svga -- no need for a separate server. > ... >> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into >> slowly > You wrote in another mail: " Several groups are working on a generic > hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use > these to detect hardware." > > I agree. We shouldn't make our own laptop hardware detection program. > But the projects I checked, didn't support certain laptop hardware > detection yet. For instance, I would like to have IrDA controller, > ACPI and VESA/VBE correctly detected. Of coarse the actual list > is longer. - Therefore my intension is, to have some laptop people > working together with a good hardware detection program. > Personally I prefer the Mandrake - Lothar - Project (but > this has to be researched). And an according Debian package. > Agreed.
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > > Why framebuffer? - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card support, at least if the card manufacturers follow the VESA VBE standard. - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > pentium ops are actually minimal compared to the -O2 output from egcc, plus > the > code is larger Do we have kind of a benchmark, let's say for X build with options. ... > the xserver in potato works with all supported Neomagic chips, a separate > neomagic server is no longer needed I checked http://www.debian.org/Packages/unstable/x11/ today. 'neomagic' isn't in the headlines. Where shall I look? ... > the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into > slowly You wrote in another mail: " Several groups are working on a generic hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use these to detect hardware." I agree. We shouldn't make our own laptop hardware detection program. But the projects I checked, didn't support certain laptop hardware detection yet. For instance, I would like to have IrDA controller, ACPI and VESA/VBE correctly detected. Of coarse the actual list is longer. - Therefore my intension is, to have some laptop people working together with a good hardware detection program. Personally I prefer the Mandrake - Lothar - Project (but this has to be researched). And an according Debian package. Cheers -werner- -- Werner Heuser | There is no time, /~~ LiLAC - Linux with Laptop Computers | ... to make war ... /~~~ Berlin, Germany | -Lou Reed-/ T. +49 30 349 53 86 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.snafu.de/~wehe/index_li.html
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry schrieb: > > Why framebuffer? - usually for every new graphic card there has to be a Linux X server developed. Framebuffer is kind of 'generic' graphic card support, at least if the card manufacturers follow the VESA VBE standard. - framebuffer devices could use the hardware better, they avoid the current video memory mapping 'concept' (I'm not a hardware wizard, please correct me, if I'm not clear here) > pentium ops are actually minimal compared to the -O2 output from egcc, plus > the > code is larger Do we have kind of a benchmark, let's say for X build with options. ... > the xserver in potato works with all supported Neomagic chips, a separate > neomagic server is no longer needed I checked http://www.debian.org/Packages/unstable/x11/ today. 'neomagic' isn't in the headlines. Where shall I look? ... > the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into > slowly You wrote in another mail: " Several groups are working on a generic hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use these to detect hardware." I agree. We shouldn't make our own laptop hardware detection program. But the projects I checked, didn't support certain laptop hardware detection yet. For instance, I would like to have IrDA controller, ACPI and VESA/VBE correctly detected. Of coarse the actual list is longer. - Therefore my intension is, to have some laptop people working together with a good hardware detection program. Personally I prefer the Mandrake - Lothar - Project (but this has to be researched). And an according Debian package. Cheers -werner- -- Werner Heuser | There is no time, /~~ LiLAC - Linux with Laptop Computers | ... to make war ... /~~~ Berlin, Germany | -Lou Reed-/ T. +49 30 349 53 86 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.snafu.de/~wehe/index_li.html
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On 14-Sep-99 NatePuri wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:02:52AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: >> I am packaging divine, should appear in the next week - I have to get libnet >> happy and packaged first. > > What is divine? > http://www.fefe.de/divine/ >> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into >> slowly > > I'm very interested in hardware detection. Can you tell me more? Thanks. > Several groups are working on a generic hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use these to detect hardware. Look in the proposal, Werner has data on both of these. Also, see mandrake linux's web page for info.
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On 14-Sep-99 NatePuri wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:02:52AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: >> I am packaging divine, should appear in the next week - I have to get libnet >> happy and packaged first. > > What is divine? > http://www.fefe.de/divine/ >> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into >> slowly > > I'm very interested in hardware detection. Can you tell me more? Thanks. > Several groups are working on a generic hardware detection interface -- once finished any linux can use these to detect hardware. Look in the proposal, Werner has data on both of these. Also, see mandrake linux's web page for info.
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:02:52AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> I am packaging divine, should appear in the next week - I have to get libnet
> happy and packaged first.
What is divine?
> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into
> slowly
I'm very interested in hardware detection. Can you tell me more? Thanks.
--
NatePuri ("natedawg")
Certified Law Student
McGeorge School of Law
Sacramento, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ompages.com
http://office.ompages.com/~natedawg
PGP: http://www.ompages.com/PGP.html
UIN: 43504034
IRC: office.ompages.com #ompages
pgpC74F2GcuM7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: the laptop proposal -- ideas, thoughts, and criticisms
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:02:52AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> I am packaging divine, should appear in the next week - I have to get libnet
> happy and packaged first.
What is divine?
> the hardware detection is much larger than laptops and is being looked into
> slowly
I'm very interested in hardware detection. Can you tell me more? Thanks.
--
NatePuri ("natedawg")
Certified Law Student
McGeorge School of Law
Sacramento, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ompages.com
http://office.ompages.com/~natedawg
PGP: http://www.ompages.com/PGP.html
UIN: 43504034
IRC: office.ompages.com #ompages
pgpcRNdwGZQPh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
