From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jan 22 0: 1:18 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8FF237B401 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:01:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from postfix3-2.free.fr (postfix3-2.free.fr [213.228.0.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1565243F3F for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:01:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nsouch@free.fr) Received: from armor.fastether (nas-cbv-11-62-147-120-213.dial.proxad.net [62.147.120.213]) by postfix3-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 009ADC0B5 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:01:15 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 6837 invoked by uid 1001); 22 Jan 2003 08:15:19 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:15:19 +0100 From: Nicolas Souchu To: Alexander@Leidinger.net Cc: Marcel Moolenaar , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Newbusifying kbd? Message-ID: <20030122091519.B6700@armor.fastether> References: <20030119225129.A6948@armor.fastether> <20030119233031.GA24377@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030120074638.A11055@armor.fastether> <20030120222027.GA597@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <3E2D173C.3040507@graphics.cs.uni-sb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3E2D173C.3040507@graphics.cs.uni-sb.de>; from netchild@graphics.cs.uni-sb.de on Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 10:47:40AM +0100 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 10:47:40AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > [KGI] > > > I took a quick look at it. I'm not opposed to having graphics support > > in the kernel. The problem I think I see is that we probably have > > enough interest to make standard VGA work, but never really have the > > people or interest to keep up with the latest and greatest graphics > > engine. So, I think this would be useful only in a model where the > > graphics drivers are contributed and the X server makes use of it. > > So, if XFree86 changes to this model, then I see potential... > > Chicken and egg problem... as far as I remember (I looked at it looong > ago) they have a X server too... or at least they want to provide one. KGI provides a X server accelerated (PhoneiX) implementation not based on X. On the other hand GGI (http://www.ggi-project.org), the user library going with KGI does provide XFree86 (called XGGI) running) on top of the KGI driver framework without its own drivers. Nicholas -- Nicholas Souchu - nsouch@free.fr - nsouch@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message