nanogui: Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem


Previous by date: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: nanox+flnx problem, Florian Berger
Next by date: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: nanox+flnx problem, Jordan Crouse
Previous in thread: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem, Greg Haerr
Next in thread: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem, svdweyer.juptech.com

Subject: Re: [nanogui] Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem
From: Dan Fandrich ####@####.####
Date: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000
Message-Id: <20020715135428.A13607@intrinsyc.com>

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 07:21:18AM -0700, Greg Haerr wrote:
> > I had a similar problem with a two-framebuffer setup.  To fix it, I had to
> "#define HAVETEXTMODE 0" in drivers/scr_fb.c.
> >
> > Greg, is there any chance that this option (and the "EMBEDDEDPLANET" one)
> can be moved to the config file, to make it easier to find?  Also, could
> (some of?) the options at the top of "device.h" also be moved to the config
> file?
> 
> Yes, I agree that I should clean up and make better known
> all of the #ifdefs.  I'm a little worried about the config file
> getting too complicated, however, which is why I stuck some
> of the options at the top of the device.h file.
> 
> What does everyone else think?

I think it's more complicated having to search out options in two different
places, and know which one are safe to change and which may have unintended
side effects.  For example, there are some more defined at the top of
devimage.c that therefore work only in that file.  Disabling HAVE_MMAP
there won't affect any other file that might be trying to use mmap.

There aren't that many more definitions, so I would say add them to
config with all the rest of the user-defined options.  Some more
verbose comments describing the various options would help manage the
complexity.

>>> Dan
-- 
Daniel Fandrich
Embedded Developer
Intrinsyc Software, Inc.
10th Floor, 700 West Pender
Vancouver, BC  V6C 1G8
604-801-6461
fax: 604-801-6417
http://www.intrinsyc.com

Previous by date: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: nanox+flnx problem, Florian Berger
Next by date: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: nanox+flnx problem, Jordan Crouse
Previous in thread: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem, Greg Haerr
Next in thread: 15 Jul 2002 21:07:47 -0000 Re: Starting Nano-X on /dev/fb1 problem, svdweyer.juptech.com


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.