[directfb-users] Re: matroxfb.o

To: directfb-users@directfb.org
Subject: [directfb-users] Re: matroxfb.o
From: Ville Syrjälä <syrjala@sci.fi>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 00:27:31 +0200
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
In-reply-to: <3E442C9B.2060105@home.ro>; from nufarul.alb@home.ro on Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 02:00:59PM -0800
Mail-followup-to: directfb-users@directfb.org
References: <3E442C9B.2060105@home.ro>
Sender: directfb-users-bounce@directfb.org

On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 02:00:59PM -0800, Nufarul Alb wrote:
> on a matrox card (matrox g550), is it absolutely necesary to use the 
> matrox specific framebuffer module??

Yes.

> if yes, why?

DirectFB needs access to framebuffer memory and chip registers. Also
the chip is identified by the accelrator id returned by the fbdev driver.

> and what advantages vs. vesafb.o would be there?

Mode switching at least.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
syrjala@sci.fi
http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/


-- 
Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@directfb.org with 
"unsubscribe directfb-users" as subject.

References:
- [directfb-users] matroxfb.o
  - From: Nufarul Alb <nufarul.alb@home.ro>

Prev by Date: [directfb-users] matroxfb.o
Next by Date: [directfb-users] Is is eady to improve / extend 5005 driver
Previous by thread: [directfb-users] matroxfb.o
Next by thread: [directfb-users] Is is eady to improve / extend 5005 driver
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Home | Main Index | Thread Index