@ilovejedd:
Huh. Will have to fix that, thanks! (to match against someting like "i.MX[[:space:]]?[6-7]" instead)
That's mainly to pickup a potentially slightly better optimized binary, there's no functional change.
As far as logging goes, it's because eips is not accounting for dpi (and is still using the exact same cell size since the PW, which means it's been rendering text smaller and smaller as the years went on
), unlike FBInk, so, yeah, the font is going to be bigger (plus, it's already "bigger/blockier" to begin with, since the default font is ye olde IBM VGA font (as seen in your BIOS POST, f.g.), i.e., it's semi-bold), whereas eips's one is thin. Also, one of 'em is square (FBInk), the other tall-ish (eips).
The scaling tries to match the original intent of the PW days (as far as column width is concerned), as that looked perfectly fine at the time (and is what I roughly based the length of my messages on).
But, on 300dpi devices, we jump a scaling step, mainly to make things better on 7" & 8" devices, where eips is ridiculously unreadable.
Which means things might be a tad cramped on 6" 300dpi devices like the PW4, even if the maths still yields roughly the same amount of columns as expected (>= 32 IIRC).