Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 20 of 20
Actually, I'm interested in setting up my text console (during bootup) so that it's at the right resolution (1280x1024). Is the kernel framebuffer the right thing that I should look ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Linux Engineer
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    1,319

    Actually, I'm interested in setting up my text console (during bootup) so that it's at the right resolution (1280x1024). Is the kernel framebuffer the right thing that I should look into?
    The best things in life are free.

  2. #12
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578
    Yeah, it is. However, you should be aware that the framebuffer almost always is a lot slower than the text mode terminal. Running ls /usr/bin or similar can take several seconds since the scrolling takes so much CPU time.

  3. #13
    Linux Engineer Giro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,219
    I didnt notice any speed loss when using fb on my 400Mhz K6 anyone else notice a speed decrese?

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close
  5. #14
    Linux Guru sarumont's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    /dev/urandom
    Posts
    3,682
    I've never seen a hit in speed on just a framebuffer'd console, but I have noticed the scroll speed slowing down on a fb/bootsplash console. It does look purday, though.

    bpark: For help setting this up, check here: http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3523
    "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so."
    ~Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

  6. #15
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578
    Admittedly, it might be that I've mainly been playing with the VESA FB driver. As far as I remember, the nVidia FB driver also had a pretty bad speed hit. I may be wrong, though.

  7. #16
    Linux Guru sarumont's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    /dev/urandom
    Posts
    3,682
    When I last checked, it was dangerous to run nVidia fb drivers, so I used vesa. Now I'm on an ATI and the radeon fb driver works well, but vesa would be safe for any card.
    "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so."
    ~Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

  8. #17
    Linux Engineer kriss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,113
    What harm would/could the nvidia fb drivers do?

  9. #18
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578
    There was a bug in nVidia's XF86 driver that would crash your computer if you ran both it and an nVidia FB, and switched to the FB console from X. AFAIK, that's been fixed now, though.

  10. #19
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Posts
    390
    Yeah there was something in the kernel I didn't have built. So bootsplash is built into the kernels now and doesn't require any patching? I'm not sure what exactly got it working with this kernel seeing as I patched it... Oh well I guess I'll find out next time a kernel is released.

  11. #20
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    70
    Ok, all my frame buffer options are blanked out... why?

    I have the 2.4.24 sources.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •