Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts

["D. Hazelton" <dhazelton@enter.net>]

On Friday 02 June 2006 02:58, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 6/1/06, D. Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> wrote:
> > VT switch to a VT where X is running. X will still require a VT and
> > assume it has good access to the graphics system. While currently it has
> > no problems, when drmcon becomes a reality there will have to be a state
> > switch between the consoles settings and the setting for the VT running
> > X.
> >
> > > > 14) backwards compatible, an old X server should still run on a new
> > > > kernel. I will allow for new options to be enabled at run-time so
> > > > that this isn't possible, but just booting a kernel and starting X
> > > > should work.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure we want to continue supporting every X server released in
> > > the last 25 years. But we should definitely support any X server
> > > released in a 2.6 based kernel distribution. What are reasonable
> > > limits?
> >
> > This is not a supportable position, Jon. I haven't seen it myself, but
> > I'm willing to bet there are still a few systems out there running X5 but
> > have a recent kernel. Since X version prior to 6 are no longer in wide
> > use, however, this is something that could be done with little damage to
> > anyone.
> >
> > But it still breaks the spirit of Linus' directive to "break nothing"
>
> I don't know if break nothing applies to operating systems
> masquerading as applications. "Break nothing" works both ways. Old X
> servers are doing things like messing with the PCI bus that breaks new
> kernels.
>
> Use some common sense here, who would update to a 2006 kernel and keep
> running an X server from 1989? Pick a reasonable limit and say the
> rest are unsupported. Why make a pile of work for yourself that no
> sane person is ever going to make use of.
>
> Remember, an X server from 1989 only contains drivers for hardware
> from 1989 and earlier. Can 2.6 Linux boot on a 1989 PC with an 8514
> graphics card? Does it support running in 640K with an AboveBoard?
> Does anyone even remember what an AboveBoard did?

Okay, okay. Point taken. And note that I did state that X versions prior to 6 
(hell, AFAIK, prior to 6.5) aren't in any widespread use. And the Elks 
version of Linux could run a 1989 system. Not that I think these changes will 
make it into Elks, but...

DRH