<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="https://dev1galaxy.org/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=5400&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Dev1 Galaxy Forum / Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
		<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=5400</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 22:48:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39388#p39388</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>pungentweasel wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Very childish.&#160; If you don&#039;t care about the linux framebuffer, then I&#039;m not sure why you&#039;re even involving yourself in a conversation about it.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Just trollin d00d.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>pungentweasel wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>It&#039;s old tech and it&#039;s fun to mess around with, and it&#039;s good to see that someone is doing the work to resuscitate and improve it</p></div></blockquote></div><p>+1. Nice toy. Thanks for sharing.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Head_on_a_Stick)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 22:48:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39388#p39388</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39383#p39383</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Head_on_a_Stick wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Dear me, what a bloat monster tongue<br />...<br />As a gamer I can happily confirm this. Linux is now a better platform for gaming than Windows, which pleases me much more than these shiny new toys irritate you.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Very childish.&#160; If you don&#039;t care about the linux framebuffer, then I&#039;m not sure why you&#039;re even involving yourself in a conversation about it.</p><p>Nobody is suggesting that old framebuffer tech is in any way better than modern graphics backends... nor is anyone expecting a flawless experience, much less trying to &quot;game&quot; on the framebuffer.&#160; It&#039;s old tech and it&#039;s fun to mess around with, and it&#039;s good to see that someone is doing the work to resuscitate and improve it. To some of us, this is what makes linux fun to use and tinker with.&#160; If that&#039;s not you, then that&#039;s fine.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (pungentweasel)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:52:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39383#p39383</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39358#p39358</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Dear me, what a bloat monster tongue</p></div></blockquote></div><p><img src="https://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /><br />It was a wonderful attempt to create a truly complete windowing environment.<br />A single graphic library, a complete set of GUIs for system maintenance.<br />Even today, this works, although, unfortunately, Konqueror can only be called a web browser.<br />And by downloading a full-fledged, the same Firefox, you can forget about the minimum memory for DE.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (aluma)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 12:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39358#p39358</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39356#p39356</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>aluma wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Here are the requirements for Trinity - &quot;Trinity desktop - 300MHz CPU / 256MB RAM / 3GB disk&quot;</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Dear me, what a bloat monster <img src="https://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/tongue.png" width="15" height="15" alt="tongue" /></p><div class="quotebox"><cite>pungentweasel wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>One practical example of the usefulness of the raw framebuffer:&#160; My laptop has AMD graphics.. and I can use the open source amdgpu driver. That&#039;s great... except, in order for the kernel to load amdgpu, it requires closed-source non-free firmware and there&#039;s no way to know what that code is doing. Not so great.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>So block the amdgpu module and use VESA in X instead then.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>pungentweasel wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>mplayer -vo fbdev2 file.mp4</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I tried this with https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Tearing-test.webm and the tearing in the console is absolutely atrocious, completely unbearable. Under Wayland (sway) that same video running in the same player is perfectly smooth with no tearing (or lag) whatsoever. This is with amdgpu and an AMD Cezanne iGPU. And the non-free firmware :-)</p><p>EDIT: and I couldn&#039;t get the console output to work without adding my user to the video group, which is completely unacceptable.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>there&#039;s no requirement to actually use those functions though</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Just as under the Wayland protocol then.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>whose primary targets appear to be &quot;high refresh rate&quot; (aka gaming woo)</p></div></blockquote></div><p>As a gamer I can happily confirm this. Linux is now a better platform for gaming than Windows, which pleases me much more than these shiny new toys irritate you.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Head_on_a_Stick)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39356#p39356</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39355#p39355</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Head_on_a_Stick wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>It&#039;s using both a compositor <em>and</em> a window manager...</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Sure. Unless everything has changed since I last used it, there&#039;s no requirement to actually use those functions though.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>Head_on_a_Stick wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>As I said, Wayland is simpler, more direct and more widely adopted with better support.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>You can try and sell me on Wayland all you like, but until it does all the things X can do I really have very little use for it.</p><p>A simple framebuffer for the TTY? that I&#039;ll use, if infrequently. A rich networked display server for more complex GUI environments? cool.<br />Something in-between, whose primary targets appear to be &quot;high refresh rate&quot; (aka gaming woo) and better support for &quot;devices&quot;... Yeah, I don&#039;t really need that at all.</p><p>If Wayland was X+, I&#039;d be keen. Right now it appears to be X- with a number of missing features, and were I to switch to it I&#039;d end up running something in xwayland ~80% of the time anyway. <br />Why is replacing X with something that can&#039;t do all the things X can useful?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (steve_v)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:06:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39355#p39355</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39352#p39352</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Head_on_a_Stick wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><div class="quotebox"><cite>directfb2.github.io wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Components running on DirectFB graphics backend are based on libdirectfb.so library. Compositing windowing system is performed by the default libdirectfb.so window manager module with libdirectfbwm_default.so <ins>plugin</ins>.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>It&#039;s using both a compositor <em>and</em> a window manager...</p></div></blockquote></div><p>To be clear, it&#039;s only a plugin.&#160; Wayland might be the &quot;latest and greatest&quot;, but there&#039;s something fun about using older, much simpler tech that&#039;s built directly into the kernel and compatible on any and all hardware you throw at it</p><p>One practical example of the usefulness of the raw framebuffer:&#160; My laptop has AMD graphics.. and I can use the open source amdgpu driver. That&#039;s great... <em>except</em>, in order for the kernel to load amdgpu, it requires closed-source non-free firmware and there&#039;s no way to know what that code is doing. Not so great.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Because you can, windows are bloat, and who needs a window manager anyway when you have 12 TTYs?<br />Or maybe, because needing to run a full-blown WM and compositor on something with no use for windowing or a GUI (e.g. a &quot;digital picture frame&quot; type device or monitor for a video stream) just to get basic framebuffer video output is patently silly?</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Exactly 👍&#160; Running a complete system directly from TTYs is a completely viable option, and probably by far the most resource-friendly option available.&#160; Check out the <a href="https://github.com/rothgar/awesome-tuis" rel="nofollow">Awesome TUIs</a> project</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>Camtaf wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Yes, if I remember right, you could play video with the likes of mplayer, &amp; maybe have graphics in a text type web browser in a command line installation - it&#039;s been a long time since, but I&#039;m pretty sure I used to watch videos.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Yep.. you can give it a try now.. it works surprisingly well and runs very smooth.&#160; &#160;mplayer -vo fbdev2 file.mp4</p><p>If you compile sdl2 with fbdev support, and run mpv media player with --vo=sdl, you can use the invidtui software for a full-featured Youtube client in the console using Invidious instances, running entirely from the framebuffer.&#160; Without fbdev it will use kms/drm, which also works well, but requires the graphics driver which likely requires non-free firmware.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (pungentweasel)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:23:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39352#p39352</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39351#p39351</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>oh look, it&#039;s OpenBSD running X with Dillo and memory to spare in a VM assigned 128MiB. Nice.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Here are the requirements for Trinity - &quot;Trinity desktop - 300MHz CPU / 256MB RAM / 3GB disk&quot;.<br /><a href="https://q4os.org/downloads1.html" rel="nofollow">https://q4os.org/downloads1.html</a><br />Yes, it will work, but any program you download will be, figuratively speaking, in swap. Who today has the patience for such feats? <img src="https://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (aluma)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:46:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39351#p39351</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39347#p39347</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>With links and directfb, you can run a graphics capable web browser in a TTY as well... That means a browser capable of accessing the current-day internet for machines with &lt;128MB RAM.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>lol</p><p>Or just install an operating system that isn&#039;t ridiculously bloated by default:</p><p><a href="https://postimg.cc/z3phR7T4" rel="nofollow"><span class="postimg"><img src="https://i.postimg.cc/z3phR7T4/2022-12-14-101653-1280x768-scrot.png" alt="2022-12-14-101653-1280x768-scrot.png" /></span></a></p><p>^ oh look, it&#039;s OpenBSD running X with Dillo and memory to spare in a VM assigned 128MiB. Nice.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Or maybe, because needing to run a full-blown WM and compositor on something with no use for windowing or a GUI (e.g. a &quot;digital picture frame&quot; type device or monitor for a video stream) just to get basic framebuffer video output is patently silly?</p></div></blockquote></div><p>So you haven&#039;t read the DirectFB specifications then?</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>directfb2.github.io wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Components running on DirectFB graphics backend are based on libdirectfb.so library. Compositing windowing system is performed by the default libdirectfb.so window manager module with libdirectfbwm_default.so plugin.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>It&#039;s using both a compositor <em>and</em> a window manager...</p><p>As I said, Wayland is simpler, more direct and more widely adopted with better support.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Head_on_a_Stick)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 11:50:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39347#p39347</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39341#p39341</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>If we divide computers into workstations and servers (including media servers), then everything will fall into place and the framebuffer will find its place, as I understand it.</p><p>And there have already been attempts, with the help of a stripped-down Linux, to make a netbook, limiting the size of the memory and the performance of the processor. Nothing good happened.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (aluma)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39341#p39341</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39339#p39339</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Camtaf wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Yes, if I remember right, you could play video with the likes of mplayer, &amp; maybe have graphics in a text type web browser in a command line installation - it&#039;s been a long time since, but I&#039;m pretty sure I used to watch videos.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I used to do this as well, and further back with svgalib... Both on hardware far too slow to play video from X, and with too little memory for a full DE.</p><p>With links and directfb, you can run a graphics capable web browser in a TTY as well... That means a browser capable of accessing the current-day internet for machines with &lt;128MB RAM.<br />Now we just need, say, a i386 Debian/Devuan &quot;revival&quot; as well. Perfectly Good Pentium deprecation stupidity and all that.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>Head_on_a_Stick wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>why is running graphics from a console screen useful?</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Because you can, windows are bloat, and who needs a window manager anyway when you have 12 TTYs?<br />Or maybe, because needing to run a full-blown WM and compositor on something with no use for windowing or a GUI (e.g. a &quot;digital picture frame&quot; type device or monitor for a video stream) just to get basic framebuffer video output is patently silly?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (steve_v)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 04:17:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39339#p39339</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39328#p39328</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Bohdi Linux with Moksha/Enlightenment could do it (video in the term) if I remember correctly.</p><p>TC</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (trinidad)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 18:58:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39328#p39328</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39326#p39326</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Yes, if I remember right, you could play video with the likes of mplayer, &amp; maybe have graphics in a text type web browser in a command line installation - it&#039;s been a long time since, but I&#039;m pretty sure I used to watch videos.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Camtaf)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 17:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39326#p39326</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39324#p39324</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Well yes but Wayland offers similarly direct access to the video hardware via KVM.</p><p>Or to put in another way: why is running graphics from a console screen useful?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Head_on_a_Stick)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:16:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39324#p39324</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39322#p39322</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I think frame buffers allow graphics in the (virtual) terminals, don&#039;t they(?).</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Camtaf)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 15:02:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39322#p39322</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Revival of the Linux Framebuffer & DirectFB]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39319#p39319</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Wayland compositors access the graphics hardware directly using KMS. What advantage does DirectFB2 offer over that? Seems like an unnecessary added layer for the current Linux graphics stack. Apologies if I am misunderstanding the protocol, I&#039;m not an expert.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Head_on_a_Stick)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 12:25:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=39319#p39319</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
