From: Jason McMullan <jmcc@ontv.com>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: 31 Jul 1998 13:38:57 GMT

Re: a FAQ... been away for a while...

Jon M. Taylor <taylorj@ecs.csus.edu> wrote with confidence:
> On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, Edward S. Marshall wrote:
>> Woohoo! Anyone working on a SPARC port? :-)
> 
> 	GGI Console should be architecture-neutral, shouldn't it?  fbcon
> is, AFAIK.  IIRC the scroller class should call out to the lower-level
> framebuffer device handler (either KGI or fbdev).  Even those layers would
> be arch-neutral as well - only the drivers themselves would be
> arch-specific.  That is the way it is done now with fbcon - the sbus cgsix
> fbcon driver is sitting in drivers/video along with Open Firmware (mac
> PPC) drivers, Amiga drivers, Atari drivers, x86 drivers and abstract
> drivers like the VESA and virtual-FB drivers.  I imagine the situation 
> would be the same for input devices, printers, or any other type of IO 
> device that the console might need to use.

	Yes, the _theory_ is that it should be architecture neutral.
The fact is that the LinuxPPC guys' kernel doesn't accurately
track the mainline kernel (a 1Mb diff -u on 2.1.103 vs. 2.1.103-pmac!),
and that the initial console drivers (linux/drivers/console/{ARCH})
need to be written... Along with the misc improvemnts I've been 
wanting to make... And the fact that I'm also working on getting the
ethernet card to work....


-- 
Jason McMullan - Linux - GGI - http://pepsi.visus.com/~jmcc

On the wonderful world of Microsoft Products:

  Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's 
  already built into the User?
	-- Steve Shaw <nospamola_sbshaws@kc-primary.net>
	   comp.os.linux.advocacy