> > PS: http://www.linux-fbdev.org/ > > http://linuxconsole.sourceforge.net/ > > > > I couldn't find a reference to the "2.5 to-do list" at either site. > Is this similar to the Convergence "ActiveFB" API? I don't know anything about the ActiveFB API. It was discussed as feature for Ruby (what the codename for the 2.5.x console subsystem code is). I don't follow the fbdev discussions that closely, don't know whenever they are still designing stuff or if there is already code somewhere. I havn't seen the overlay stuff mentioned, but did a quick scan of the pages only. You should find something in the mail list archives ... > > s/X11/fb/ then. > > That went over my head. Replace X-Server with framebuffer driver (in alan text which I had quoted), it fills the same function (encapsulate hardware access) for embedded stuff. > Alan Cox wrote: > > Oh that bit I follow - its true for about another > > 12-18 months anyway, maybe longer. > > Is their an X upcoming that will fit on small boxes? Is reverse-bloat > in X's future? (I realize that feature-bloat is not only X, but WM's > atop X.) X11 itself isn't that big. Most bloat comes from Desktops like KDE and GNOME. Also from applications with lots of eye-candy (the X-Server needs memory for all the pixmaps), mozilla for example. For somewhat more realistic numbers I'd try to compare Qt embedded with Qt for X11. For X11 you probably need a few more megabytes memory. Given today's memory prices I'd expect the difference isn't very big, and it will become smaller over time ... > Or, are you saying that hardware prices will be cheaper in the future? ... that's why. Gerd -- Damn lot people confuse usability and eye-candy.
