On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:38:39 -0700 (PDT), Mike Mestnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about moving the DRM and FB specific code into there own per card > libs? > > radeon - attached to hardware > radeon-drm > drm - library > radeon-fb > fb - library > fbcon - library
Fell free to convert the merged radeon driver in to a driver plus two libs if you want. I'll accept the patch back. You'll need to wait until I get the merged driver working. What I don't want is two independent implementations of the hardware initialization code like we currently have. The point of merging is to make sure that a single logical driver programs the hardware is a consistent way. We spend so much time talking about splitting the radeon driver into pieces. But I don't hear anyone saying I can't ship my product because the radeon driver is 120K and all I can handle is 60K. I'm not going to spend a week's work breaking things up and testing them just because of some theoretical need for a non-existant embedded system. When this hypothetical embedded system shows up the people making the money off from the system can do the work. If an embedded system is really that memory constrained they should just use the existing fbdev radeon driver. There is no way a system with that little of memory needs to worry about VT switching to X with DRM. -- Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
