On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 13:55:59 +0200 
 Frank van der Linden <frank@wins.uva.nl> wrote:

 > I agree. While it's a good choice to stick to our own servers because
 > they're more "sane" and currently faster on one side, it would be dangerous
 > to consider XFree to be "icky PeeCee stuff", and ignore it for the alpha.
 > It has quite a bit of momentum behind it. Before you know it, it will
 > provide good support for a range of hardware on the alpha, but on
 > platforms other than NetBSD. At which point nobody will care about
 > NetBSD being the first free OS on the alpha, or about how sane our
 > own X server code is.
 > 
 > In other words: it should at least be made certain that XFree on
 > the alpha will support NetBSD.

I didn't say "ignore it for the Alpha".  I said "ignore it for the TGA,
SFB, SFB+, etc."

The TGA and SFB/SFB+ are essentially the same chip, so why not have a
unified server those THOSE devices which uses the NetBSD Sane Framebuffer
Model?

For icky PC-like hardware, use icky PC code :-)

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>