From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: request: bring back framebuffer Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:03:11 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1622933812408634727==" List-Id: --===============1622933812408634727== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Paul, I don=E2=80=99t think we would bring back framebuffer. This is very outdated technology and difficult to use and configure, especial= ly when you want to rely on auto-configuration. The point is not that it increases size of the image. The modules are all sti= ll there; the kernel is only configured to not load them. If you want a higher resolution you should be looking at DRM which more moder= n and should automatically detect the correct resolution automatically. The modules are all there. They are just not loaded and blacklisted together = with the framebuffer modules. -Michael > On 3 Apr 2022, at 16:04, paul kairis wrote: >=20 > Re: https://community.ipfire.org/t/increase-monitor-resolution/6205/23 >=20 > At times, when I go to customer sites, all I can access is the ipfire conso= le with a wide monitor 1920x1080. In the past I was able to modify GRUB and i= ncrease resolution so I can see messages as wide as possible. I brought up th= e issue to the Community site and was told framebuffer was removed on cu157 (= it existed in cu156). It would be a waste to lose all that work that someone = did in cu156. And I doubt it adds many MB to the core system. So my request i= s to bring back the framebuffer capability.=20 > Thank you, Paul >=20 >=20 --===============1622933812408634727==--