On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 02:40:42PM -0800, Allen Akin wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:17:43PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > | Except that you already have a dual-layer driver/library model, so this > | isnt adding "another" layer. Just making the existing layers more > | formalized. > > Probably I misunderstood your original comment. But just as a > clarification, libGL doesn't provide an additional interface abstraction > for OpenGL commands; it does some things for dispatch setup, and > thereafter OpenGL calls from the application jump into the driver, > preserving the OpenGL interface pretty much completely [...]
When I say driver, I mean *driver*. As in "a thing that gets loaded into the *kernel*" I know that there is a lot of loose talk calling the Xserver module a "driver". But it's not a driver, it's a library. A library that happens to tweak hardware, but its still a library in my book. > ... I was under the impression that you were > suggesting we needed a new layer inside the drivers. No, I'm saying we need a more generic, stable, easily portable API between the *driver*, and the DRI module in the X server. No extra layer, just improve the current one. _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
