Re: Summary uploaded

[Johnny Taporg <taporg@yahoo.com>]

Bryan Patrick Coleman <bpcolema@uncg.edu> wrote:
>
> Mabey my understanding on this one is unclear but it seems to me
like the
> KGI can use or mabey that is KGIcon calls can use FBcon in wich case
it
> would only have to use KGIcon nativly instead of FBcon. I could be
totaly
> wrong as I am not even sure what I just said but it sounded good. 

>From the GGI faq:

What is KGI?

KGI is the Kernel Graphics Interface we use for writing hardware
drivers. It is designed to be OS- and
platform independent. So in theory, a KGI driver should run on Linux
as well as on DOS, MacOS, ... and
on Linux-x86,-Alpha and -68k ... 

What is KGIcon?

KGIcon is the so called OS-driver layer, which gets linked to the
os-independent KGI parts to make the
KGI driver resemble an enhanced fbcon driver. 

Originally KGI also included the patches to the Linux kernel to
facilitate graphics access and advanced
consoles by KGI drivers, but now it is just a glue layer to bridge
between the KGI API/drivers and the
Linux kernel fbcon subsystem. This layer can be compiled into the
kernel or loaded as a module on a
recent stock kernel (2.1.1xx). 

xxx

My commentary:  if I'm reading this right, KGI is the
kernel-patched library that gives you hardware accels
and stuff, while KGIcon runs on top of KGI (possibly
as a kernel-loaded module) and allows the KGI driver
to be used for the fbcon system.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com