swsusp, thinkpad module, bootsplash

[Gain Paolo Mureddu]

Kevin Verma wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I just want to bring a list of packages I desire some one to create for Fedora 
>under extras. All relates to the kernel package maybe some one will love to 
>patch swsusp2, thinkpad module & bootsplash to Fedora core 3 kernel.
>
>http://softwaresuspend.berlios.de/
>http://bootsplash.org/
>http://bootsplash.de
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>fedora-extras-list mailing list
>fedora-extras-list at redhat.com
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
>
>  
>
As for bootsplash, I've tried to make a vanilla kernel with a mixture of 
the patchsets of Alan Cox and Con Kolivas (one for features and the 
other for performance) which incidentally add support for bootsplash. As 
you may already know, bootsplash also requires userspace applications to 
be used and configured... Anyway, I built the kernel, does boot right, 
but for some strange reason, whenever I configure bootsplash with a 
given theme, the new kernel will simply NOT display it, no  matter what 
I do. I've tried to do this very same procedure, with the same patches 
and source in a Gentoo computer and userspace programs, and there was no 
problem... WTH?!?!

I'm pretty sure there must be something that prevents its initialization 
from the initrd, but what? It doesn't matter whether you specify or not 
a different resolution of the framebuffered console (even if you compile 
*wthout* logo support, as you are supposed to) so something like vga=791 
won't work even though newer bootsplahs addimitedly has support for 
16-bit framebuffers, but if I specify vga=792 for a 32-bit (24-bit) 
1024x768 framebuffer ti doesn't work either. I'll keep trying to get 
this working with a vanilla kernel and maybe be able to extrapolate from 
there (trying to use as close as I can the same patches Red Hat uses for 
the kernels, without using those of the .src.rpm). I can't promise 
anything... I really think that a bootspalsh based graphical boot is 
preferable over the current X based one, not only becuase of the 
overhead, but because of sustomizeablity (I haven't found where to 
customize RHGB, and I've been looking for a way since FC1)