Subject: Re: Xamiga24 vs. XamigaRetina
To: Stephen Champion <email@example.com>
From: Andy Heffernan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/03/1995 19:16:16
> I'm quite happily using XamigaRetina at 1152x900x8 these days, but I
> am wondering exactly what both it and Xamiga24 are capable of - ie, what
> each is good at. Both for my own usage and for helping other people.
> I know that Xamiga24 works on Retina Z3 and cirrus based boards,
> and that XamigaRetina works on the Retina Z2, and that XamigaRetina only
> supports 8 bitplanes, while Xamiga24 supports 8/16/24 on the Retina Z3
> and 8 on other boards.
> But, does XamigaRetina work on the RetinaZ3, if so, does it take
> advantage of the blitter?
I'm pretty sure it won't work largely because XamigaRetina will open
/dev/grf1 and RetinaZ3 is /dev/grf2 (or something else) if I'm
remembering correctly. I don't know if Z3 is upward compatible or
not. The primary concern is if it will do banking.
> Does Xamiga24 work on the RetinaZ2, if so, does it support 16 and
> 24 bit modes on the Z2, as it does on the Z3?
My understanding is that Xamiga24 will work if you have Markus Wild's
BANKEDDEVPAGER support in your kernel so the server's linear accesses
to the entire bitmap will cause the grf code in the kernel do the funky
> Do they both use the grf interface? If Xamiga24 does, how does
> it handle the Cirrus boards?
XamigaRetina uses grf; I think Xamiga24 does, too.
> Visual types do each support?
xdpyinfo will tell you that for whatever server you're running now, but
you knew that already.
I always thought the big difference was that XamigaRetina has the
banked CFB code in it, while Xamiga24 has the regular old flat-address
CFB code. Building a server with both kinds would be a bit of a chore.