Hi there, 2008/11/26 Aliner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Should we try building libEGL and the EGL driver for DRI first? > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Aliner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I was thinking, the Glamo supports OpenGL ES 1.1 >> Are we going to implement Mesa as a full OpenGL 2.x or are we going to do >> a proper OpenGL ES implementation? >> I've been going back and forth with this, on the one side if you implement >> OpenGL you have lots of applications >> that won't need to be re-written. But, in order to comply with a OpenGL >> specification there is a lot of stuff that needs to be implemented in >> software. >> And another thing, doing shaders in software is going to suck big time. >> [...]
I started reading the 3D spec. I did not expect the chip to support so much of GL in hardware. It even works with floating point input data (internal precision seems to be 24bit), which is a requirement to get any OpenGL software running reasonable at all. Bump mapping.. trilinear filtering .. 8 lights.. I do not know what is missing for OpenGL 1.X support. The Spec claims to be OpenGL|ES 1.0 compilant. I believe we should try to get ES working first, then look what would be missing for plain GL without shaders. Does Mesa already provide an OpenGL|ES API? Is Mesa a good starting point at all? kind regards Andreas _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
